Sony Aiming for Sub-$400 PlayStation 4 Price

I owned every playstation to date and despite me not being into console gaming much aside from the NHL games and gran turismo.
My ps3 has been my media player however. I don't have cable or netflix but I download like a motherfucker and my ps3 gets hours of use every day.
My launch 20gb, with occasional gaming and lots of media time has been rock solid.

I wasn't going to get the next gen, but I just got a new plasma and at $400 for a new console that's nothing.

Microsoft rubbed a lot of people the wrong way so far, if sony doesn't fallow suit things look promiSsing for the ps4
 
The way MS seems to be pissing off their customers on the next gen thing Sony should charge more, not less ... losing money on the hardware has been getting them in trouble for awhile ... they need to take a page from the Apple and Samsung playbook and charge enough to make a substantial profit ... if the console gamers were going to switch to a non console they would have done so already ... if their features are actually better then MS then they should charge $50 more, not $50 less ... either that or bump up their software license fees by $10 (software prices have had negative inflation for years and are due for an increase anyway) ;)
 
kbrickley said:
The way MS seems to be pissing off their customers on the next gen thing Sony should charge more, not less ... losing money on the hardware has been getting them in trouble for awhile ... they need to take a page from the Apple and Samsung playbook and charge enough to make a substantial profit ... if the console gamers were going to switch to a non console they would have done so already ... if their features are actually better then MS then they should charge $50 more, not $50 less ... either that or bump up their software license fees by $10 (software prices have had negative inflation for years and are due for an increase anyway) ;)
Click to expand...

they are selling to teenagers and parents...not entitled hipsters
 
Droc said:
they are selling to teenagers and parents...not entitled hipsters
Click to expand...

Samsung sells to teenagers and parents also and they are making money hand over fist ... if Sony wants to retain their electronics position they are competing with Samsung and the Koreans, not MS and the Americans ;)
 
chimera996 said:
For $400, I laugh at the people that bout the wii-u. Big lol :eek:
Click to expand...

Yea if Sony comes out below 400, I'd expect a hefty drop for the WiiU probably 249.99 plus a game. No one would buy a WiiU for 350 when they can get PS4 for little more. Tbh If Sony is below 400 or heaven forbid 350 no amount of Mario could stop the ass hurt coming their way.

The Xbox One probably wouldn't be far off either.
 
next-Jin said:
Yea if Sony comes out below 400, I'd expect a hefty drop for the WiiU probably 249.99 plus a game. No one would buy a WiiU for 350 when they can get PS4 for little more. Tbh If Sony is below 400 or heaven forbid 350 no amount of Mario could stop the ass hurt coming their way.

The Xbox One probably wouldn't be far off either.
Click to expand...

Day 1 Wii U buyer for $390 taxed/shipped here.... sigh. Good machine and some good games but I way overpaid for the console itself.... considering I've seen it as low as ~$230 already on hot deals.
 
guitarguy6 said:
I'll easily spend $400-500 on a GPU I upgrade every year or 2 so spending $400-500 on a console that will last 5-8 years is no problem. Getting a PS4 on launch.
Click to expand...

:confused:

So... a requirement for a gaming computer is to buy a $400~$500 GPU card every year or two in order to keep up with a console for 5-8 years?

Wow... true example of a console fan boi's perspective.
 
guitarguy6 said:
I'll easily spend $400-500 on a GPU I upgrade every year or 2 so spending $400-500 on a console that will last 5-8 years is no problem. Getting a PS4 on launch.
Click to expand...

No, you won't. Even a GeForce 8800GT 512MB still can put out better graphics/resolution/framerates on games like Battlefield 3, than an Xbox 360 can today. And that cost $299 back many years ago, close to the launch of the 360. It lasts just as long... you don't HAVE to max every slider to play a PC game.
 
Since when was the PS3 "sitting on the shelves gathering dust?" For at least a week you couldn't find one anywhere besides ebay for $1000+ from people trying to make money on them.
 
devil_trigger said:
Since when was the PS3 "sitting on the shelves gathering dust?" For at least a week you couldn't find one anywhere besides ebay for $1000+ from people trying to make money on them.
Click to expand...

That was actually a bullshit story. There was plenty of PS3 in stock across the country , the same couldn't be said for the 360. It flew off the shelves and stayed that way for quite a while. No one on ebay got an actual sale for $1,000 , those were inflated numbers and from people who ended up blowing lots of money.

PS3 launch was pure hyperbole and it was too costly to launch well. It took years before the PS3 even really put its best foot forward into the market. If it wasn't for the amazingly brisk sales in the last 4 years , it would probably have resulted in Sony leaving the console market because the PS3 is often cited as the $5 Billion dollar mistake among investors.
 
ShuttleLuv said:
It's like MS is trying to lose this one on purpose? Maybe Xbox was just a proving thing? They proved it, they came, they conquered, now they want to get the hell out?
Click to expand...
No, MS is a business, if they didn't stand to make a profit they wouldn't be releasing another Xbox. I think their goal of aiming at an all-in-one box more than the hardcore gamer market was a viable strategy - the most profitable years they've had were the last few where they pushed Xbox Live + Netflix + added more advertising. But I think they grossly miscalculated the ire of the gaming community on the used games and always on connection, and I think they bad some bad decisions with the hardware. I've never owned an Xbox though and don't really have any interest in the new one. Sony's console appeals to me much more as a gamer so far.
 
DTN107 said:
:confused:

So... a requirement for a gaming computer is to buy a $400~$500 GPU card every year or two in order to keep up with a console for 5-8 years?

Wow... true example of a console fan boi's perspective.
Click to expand...

What??? Look at my sig. I game on everything. I wasn't saying that you need to upgrade your video card to keep up with consoles. I buy a new gpu every year or so because PC gaming is awesome and I like keeping up with technology. I was simply saying that I don't mind paying $400 to $500 for a console since that console will last 5-8 years usually.
 
NKD said:
You have the wrong info there. PS4 has a way better chip inside than the 7770. It has almost 170GB/s memory bandwidth,
Click to expand...
Little is known about both consoles, and this is Sony so who knows what nonsense they throw around. The PS2 had super large amounts of polygons per second, and the Cell chip was going to be the next KING of CPUs.

Neurofreeze said:
There is nothing inherently slower with putting a GPU on the motherboard. In fact it has many advantages, electrically.

The reason why onboard solutions are slower is because they are cheap and meant to be so.

The only reason why an onboard GPU in the PS4 or Xbox1 would be slower than an equivalent desktop GPU is simply because they stripped it down some to save cost (it is, afterall, a ~$400 machine), not because it's onboard.
Click to expand...
Onboard usually means cheap. Game consoles are meant to be cheap computers. State of the art cheap, but cheap non the less. It's been like that historically.

The Sega Gensis uses a Motorola 6800k cpu, which was the same chips used in the Machintosh computers of that time period. Running at 6 Mhz, but by 1990 Apple had them @ 8 Mhz, and by 1991 @ 16 Mhz. So the Genesis chip seemed slow in comparison. The mid 90's was all about MIPs, which are rarely if ever used in the PC market. Then in the 200's it was all about PowerPC. Now it seems to finally be x86.

Point is console systems are meant to be cheap, cause you couldn't afford a computer back in 1990. Get a $2500 Macintosh or a $200 Sega Genesis, the choice wasn't very hard was it? Though the PS4 would be extremely impressive if they can pull off $350 for those specs. Even if they did pull off that price, a competent gaming PC can be had for $500.

Though seriously at $350 I would buy one and wait for someone to hack it, just so I can put Linux on it and run Steam games. Cause that would honestly be bad ass.
 
guitarguy6 said:
You don't HAVE to max every slider to max on a PC game, but that max setting si what makes PC gaming awesome :cool:
Click to expand...

But if you only want console quality, your silly hypothetical falls right apart, which I love how you quote out as "blah blah blah" :p. Nice try, but your argument was shoddy and you knew it from the start ;). PC gaming rocks for a lot of reasons, but that wasn't what you were arguing.
 
GoldenTiger said:
But if you only want console quality, your silly hypothetical falls right apart, which I love how you quote out as "blah blah blah" :p. Nice try, but your argument was shoddy and you knew it from the start ;). PC gaming rocks for a lot of reasons, but that wasn't what you were arguing.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure if I worded my original post poorly or you guys aren't understanding what I meant. My point was that since I don't mind spending $400-500 on a video card every year or two (which is definitely not necessary) I certainly don't mind spending $400 - 500 on a console every 5 years or more.
 
guitarguy6 said:
I'm not sure if I worded my original post poorly or you guys aren't understanding what I meant. My point was that since I don't mind spending $400-500 on a video card every year or two (which is definitely not necessary) I certainly don't mind spending $400 - 500 on a console every 5 years or more.
Click to expand...

I understood exactly what you said. I dont know why everyone else misunderstood. I feel the same as well, consoles have a tendency to produce better and better games within their life time on the same hardware. PC gaming just doesnt have the same privilege. Want games to look better buy better hardware. Console are more optimization and even more creative/innovative programming to get things to look better on years old hardware. Each has their own advantages. But for the value a Console will last longer and have more updates and improvements than any PC part will ever have. Not that I dont enjoy PC gaming I do immensely and its my go to platform. But there is definitely a market for consoles and a few inherent advantages, specifically cost wise. Thats my honest opinion.
 
Ashbringer said:
.....
I have an 8 year old Xbox 360 that hasn't been touched in 3 years. I'm sure it still works, but it never saw any real use.
Click to expand...

I thought this as well. I had a 360 that had RROD's on me twice. And this was after i bought it RROD's 2nd hand for cheap(ish). So three times total that i know of. And i sold this console to get one with a HDMI output in preparation for later setup. It sat for about 12 months without use after it had been working fine after its last send-in to Microsoft to fix its latest RROD. And low and behold i sold the thing to a work colleague and the thing RROD'd right out of the box. Didn't power up once, just straight to RROD from sitting and doing NOTHING!
 
This is what happens when you use more "off the shelf" hardware instead of core crap that costs a fortune to design and make...
 
guitarguy6 said:
I'm not sure if I worded my original post poorly or you guys aren't understanding what I meant. My point was that since I don't mind spending $400-500 on a video card every year or two (which is definitely not necessary) I certainly don't mind spending $400 - 500 on a console every 5 years or more.
Click to expand...

I apologize then, I read it as "you have to spend hundreds on PC gaming a year to even keep up with console quality at all for many years, so PC sucks"... as far as what you actually meant, I agree :).
 
Budzman said:
ps4 for me after hearing this rumor.
Click to expand...

It's not rumor. It is a random number from a random guy from a random company, and the job of that company is publishing random numbers from their random employees for random newspapers, so there is something random to write about.

That is pretty much what analysts are about. Sales predictions, price predictions - random numbers pulled out of the hat full with random numbers.
 
i hope that sony's low console price kills their profitability and that people don't want to buy xbox's restricted platform and we can see a pc/steam gain a significant marketshare and force game developers to have to cater to what we want rather than being a 2nd class afterthought. Also kill god damn platform exclusive titles like that last of us game i'll never get to play.
 
gaspah said:
i hope that sony's low console price kills their profitability and that people don't want to buy xbox's restricted platform and we can see a pc/steam gain a significant marketshare and force game developers to have to cater to what we want rather than being a 2nd class afterthought. Also kill god damn platform exclusive titles like that last of us game i'll never get to play.
Click to expand...

I hate to admit it but I think the Xbox One will still sell TONS of consoles/games. Most people do not really give a shit about the issues we're concerned with. They may of course after they realize how much MS fucked them in terms of restrictions but at the moment the general public will skew past all that with games finally being served up at E3.

Not to mention the rumors of possible ESRAM low yields will end up creating a tight launch window without a generous enough supply of the system will only end up creating hype for it and making it a hot item for Christmas. First rule of making a "Must Have" Christmas present is creating demand and shorting supply , always works and everyone wants to make someone else happy on Christmas (well for those that celebrate or give a shit).

I think Microsoft will feel its biggest hit from losing its core gaming audience , when there aren't any COD games until the next release cycle and PS4 is getting better sales on individual games the rest of the year because the core gaming audience choose it over the Xbox One then MS will notice and have to consider drastic action. It also doesn't sound like the Xbox One will be cheap to manufacture at all , so it won't be a day 1 profit like Nintendo does with its systems. It'll take years to recover profit and make cheaper versions of the same system by shrinking the die.

I guess we'll see soon enough.
 
Amazed at the current manlove for the PS4.

Especially as the amount of data actually confirmed for it makes it next to vapourware at the moment.

Thought you guys would be a little more wary by now.
 
Ashbringer said:
Waiting to see what Sony says about how used games are handled, as well as needing an always on connection. Face value, the PS4 is just a better buy then the Xbox One, but Sony isn't telling us much about how they'll handle used games and needing a connection.

I can assure you that Microsoft didn't just make this decision without considering the competition and software publishers. Microsoft may already know that Sony will be doing the same thing. Otherwise Microsoft is just guaranteed to fail against the PS4.
Click to expand...

I don't think Microsoft cares as it seems they aren't even trying to "compete" with Sony anymore.

I thought Sony said in their reveal earlier this year that they would allow used games still anyway?
 
Godmachine said:
I think Microsoft will feel its biggest hit from losing its core gaming audience
Click to expand...
I forgot where I read this, but I remember seeing some statistic somewhere that showed that most of the people using an Xbox actually used it for media streaming as oppsoed to gaming.

Again not sure where I read that, but seems like that has some legs based off of what the XBone will do.
 
nusse said:
I forgot where I read this, but I remember seeing some statistic somewhere that showed that most of the people using an Xbox actually used it for media streaming as oppsoed to gaming.

Again not sure where I read that, but seems like that has some legs based off of what the XBone will do.
Click to expand...

There was research (probably from the same Microsoft people) that showed everyone hated the Start menu and Windows 8 was going to be the most user love OS evar. :D
 
nusse said:
I forgot where I read this, but I remember seeing some statistic somewhere that showed that most of the people using an Xbox actually used it for media streaming as oppsoed to gaming.

Again not sure where I read that, but seems like that has some legs based off of what the XBone will do.
Click to expand...

Well I've mentioned that in 2006 I used my 360 for 90% gaming.

Since then the internet and what it can provide has changed a lot.

In 2013 I now use my 360 for 90% streaming and media.

I'm sure MS is aware of the stats and devising a strategy for that. I'm happy with a media box that happens to be able to play games.

You also have to remember that video gaming has now been around for quite a while and a lot of its fans are now in their late 30's to early 50's (I'm 42). Their habits and needs have changed but they are also the ones with money to dispose of.
 
you guys are setting up yourselves for failure, saying how PS4 is the console to get just because the GPU is better than xbox's. what about the psp and the nintendo hand held consoles? Almost no one is buying the the PS Vita compared to Nintendo's DXL or whatever its called.......................................................................................
 
Calling it the XBone makes it sound dirty and kinky like it's some kind of wierdly shaped dildo that's either made to simulate a dog or that it's something that runs from outlet power so you don't have to stop to replace batteries. :( What marketing department thinks this stuff up and doesn't consider what it can turn into?
 
Hulk said:
you guys are setting up yourselves for failure, saying how PS4 is the console to get just because the GPU is better than xbox's. what about the psp and the nintendo hand held consoles? Almost no one is buying the the PS Vita compared to Nintendo's DXL or whatever its called.......................................................................................
Click to expand...

There are cell phones and tablets for playing portable games. Who actually buys a dedicated games machine that has expensive games?
 
daglesj said:
Well I've mentioned that in 2006 I used my 360 for 90% gaming.

Since then the internet and what it can provide has changed a lot.

In 2013 I now use my 360 for 90% streaming and media.

I'm sure MS is aware of the stats and devising a strategy for that. I'm happy with a media box that happens to be able to play games.

You also have to remember that video gaming has now been around for quite a while and a lot of its fans are now in their late 30's to early 50's (I'm 42). Their habits and needs have changed but they are also the ones with money to dispose of.
Click to expand...

Good points. I'm okay with Microsoft going that route. I am a XBOX owner currently but won't be picking up a XBone and going PS4. I'm in the same age brakcet aas you but I use a low end PC for streaming because I can get "more" through a XBMC set up than a console and just prefer to game on one.

But I get what you're saying in regards to a "media device that also plays games" .. makes sense and I have little doubt the next xbox will still sell a lot based on that theory alone.
 
Godmachine said:
That was actually a bullshit story. There was plenty of PS3 in stock across the country
Click to expand...

Sorry but that isn't accurate at all. In my city there were none to be found and spent hours/days looking. Everyone was sold out and I doubt my fais sized city was the only one that was like that.
 
nusse said:
Good points. I'm okay with Microsoft going that route. I am a XBOX owner currently but won't be picking up a XBone and going PS4. I'm in the same age brakcet aas you but I use a low end PC for streaming because I can get "more" through a XBMC set up than a console and just prefer to game on one.

But I get what you're saying in regards to a "media device that also plays games" .. makes sense and I have little doubt the next xbox will still sell a lot based on that theory alone.
Click to expand...

Yeah things change, both services and the customers. I did think about a HTPC but for me the 360 streams stuff from my NAS and it also runs all the BBC/LoveFilm/NetFlix/Sky I could want all in one cheap box. It's there, why not use it kind of thing.

In fact also back in 2006 my girlfriend would never touch the 360. But in the past couple of years since all the media streaming came along she uses it as much as I do.

The market and demographic for 'consoles' has changed. More money to be had in TV and movies than games going forward.
 
I think going forward for this new generation the war will not be won on who sells the most consoles.

It will be won on who makes the most constant revenue per console over it's lifetime.
 
400$ for a PC with an APU CPU? You got to be kidding.

People are building HTPC for 200-300eur.
 
krneki said:
400$ for a PC with an APU CPU? You got to be kidding.

People are building HTPC for 200-300eur.
Click to expand...

There is more to creating a media/games console than just slapping together a few off the shelf midrange parts.

Even the fact the parts are already assembled for you with an OS too. Then the infrastructure behind it, the servers, the marketing, the contracts with media giants and developer deals, the cost of tweaking those off the shelf parts, shipping and distrubution....

The list goes on.

Plus I'd still expect to be running that XB1 or PS4 in 5 years time, I doubt that 300 euro box will still be around, you'll have bought another by then so that's 600 euros spent at least.:D
 
If I'm fine with the graphics a today 300Eur Pc can produce I will be fine forever. We PC enthusiast spend a lot of money on hardware because we enjoy new shiny stuff and what we see on consoles was available 10 years ago on a PC and leaves me totally indifferent.
 
daglesj said:
Plus I'd still expect to be running that XB1 or PS4 in 5 years time, I doubt that 300 euro box will still be around, you'll have bought another by then so that's 600 euros spent at least.:D
Click to expand...
Well that all depends on how game developers support the hardware. Technically speaking a PC built in 2006-2007 would still be able to play today's games just fine. A machine with a GeForce 8800 GTS would be more then capable of running today's games. That's a 2006 GPU.

An AMD a10 6800k is probably the cheapest solution to PC gaming. For $150 you get a Quad core CPU and a mid range GPU. Not exactly equivalent to the PS4 or Xbox One, but it'll last far longer then 2 years. Who's to say what's available by the time these consoles are released.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top