Sony Is Struggling With PlayStation 5 Price Due to Costly Parts

Armenius said:
Yep. I dreamed about having an AES because I absolutely loved the NEO GEO suite of arcade games. $650 USD in 1990 is nearly $1,300 USD today, or as much as a 2080 Ti. Plus $200-$300 for the games. My family couldn't afford that kind of money back then.
Click to expand...

NEO-GEO arcade games were fantastic and still hold up really well today. Makes me want to mod a 1UP with a Pi dedicated to those games. Someone even makes a kit

https://www.szabosarcades.com/products/arcade-1up-neo-geo-kit
 
Way off topic here but the Neo Geo home system was just a consolized version of the arcade platform for their games. Their arcade system actually had the games on cartridge so owners could have up to 6 installed and available at any time without needing to buy multiple expensive cabinets.

It was very expensive, but the graphical capabilities it had far surpassed anything the contemporary consoles could do.

Some of the things you guys are talking about re: Neo Geo capabilities (“slightly better than a genesis”) sounds more like the TurboGrafx 16.

The first time I remember seeing something that had (IMO) better animation than a late generation Neo Geo title like Mark of the Wolves or Last Blade 2 was Street Fighter III Third Impact, in the Dreamcast times. Though some games on Saturn came close.
 
deruberhanyok said:
Way off topic here but the Neo Geo home system was just a consolized version of the arcade platform for their games. Their arcade system actually had the games on cartridge so owners could have up to 6 installed and available at any time without needing to buy multiple expensive cabinets.

It was very expensive, but the graphical capabilities it had far surpassed anything the contemporary consoles could do.

Some of the things you guys are talking about re: Neo Geo capabilities (“slightly better than a genesis”) sounds more like the TurboGrafx 16.

The first time I remember seeing something that had (IMO) better animation than a late generation Neo Geo title like Mark of the Wolves or Last Blade 2 was Street Fighter III Third Impact, in the Dreamcast times. Though some games on Saturn came close.
Click to expand...

Exactly. And not only was the AES/MVS platform much more powerful than the other consoles, it was among the most powerful of the arcade platforms in its time.

Its quite obvious when playing Samurai Shodown or the Metal Slugs games on MAME and then comparing to any Genesis/TG16 games. SNES games that gap isn't always as obvious. Contra III, for example, was very impressive for its visuals and audio. But fighting games there's no comparison.

Saturn hardware definitely surpassed it 5 years later, but being so difficult to program for, some games certainly don't show it.
 
I had assumed all along that, since the Xbox1X debuted for $500, the Xbox sX also will launch with that same price. But what if MS is prepared to subsidize (further)?

Will Sony follow suit & match Microsoft?

https://www.thefpsreview.com/2020/0...-sonys-playstation-5-claims-industry-analyst/

During a recent episode of Bonus Round (via Pure Xbox) with games journalist Geoff Keighley, Aaron Greenberg (GM, Xbox Games Marketing), and Peter Moore (former Dreamcast, EA, and Xbox executive), Wedbush Securities analyst Michael Pachter claimed that Microsoft would be launching the Xbox Series X for just $400 this holiday.

“Microsoft’s being pretty smart about waiting Sony out here. From what I’ve seen, Sony’s going to have to charge $500 for their PS5, and Microsoft has a big balance sheet – if they want to cut the price by $100, just price below and subsidize the first ten million, they will,”
Click to expand...
Pachter said.
 
I could believe it. I think Sony knows too, that is why they have been so shy about sharing anything concrete.
 
cybereality said:
I could believe it. I think Sony knows too, that is why they have been so shy about sharing anything concrete.
Click to expand...

I was confident that MS will not outright go below $500 but maybe bundle some games or additional memory cards

But with the demand affected because of Corona, now I am not so sure that MS will stick to $500 or above.
 
$500 is just too much for the average consumer, even with inflation and COVID19 issues. I was expecting $400 and it seems like they will go that route.

Now that makes me wonder about the PS5 since it seems notably slower. While the Xbox has more powerful hardware I assume the margins are higher for the higher end parts. I think the PS5 won't launch any cheaper, but being the same price but slower can be a hindrance to the PS5's adoption rate. Exclusives will determine the winner, but this can certainly help the Xbox depending on PS5 pricing.
 
Marees said:
I had assumed all along that, since the Xbox1X debuted for $500, the Xbox sX also will launch with that same price. But what if MS is prepared to subsidize (further)?

Will Sony follow suit & match Microsoft?

https://www.thefpsreview.com/2020/0...-sonys-playstation-5-claims-industry-analyst/

During a recent episode of Bonus Round (via Pure Xbox) with games journalist Geoff Keighley, Aaron Greenberg (GM, Xbox Games Marketing), and Peter Moore (former Dreamcast, EA, and Xbox executive), Wedbush Securities analyst Michael Pachter claimed that Microsoft would be launching the Xbox Series X for just $400 this holiday.


Pachter said.
Click to expand...
The reason I think this is unlikely is because they are going to have 2 models, a lower specced xbox. Why put such an aggressive price on it if you already plan a lower specced unit to get the value oriented consumers?
 
rudy said:
The reason I think this is unlikely is because they are going to have 2 models, a lower specced xbox. Why put such an aggressive price on it if you already plan a lower specced unit to get the value oriented consumers?
Click to expand...

Outside of rumors there has been absolutely no sign of a second model. At this point it seems likely that if there is a second model it won't be out this year.
 
Derangel said:
Outside of rumors there has been absolutely no sign of a second model. At this point it seems likely that if there is a second model it won't be out this year.
Click to expand...

Yeah I don't see them doing two at once. It makes more sense to do it partway through like the PS4 Pro. Creates more interest partway through the cycle and makes people buy two consoles. Plus with demand always outstripping supply for console launches, I see that being worse with two models.
 
As a pure PC hardware enthusiast, I'd for sure consider it reasonable to charge $500ish for a console.

That's the price of a very budgety DIY PC, so what's the problem? Do the proles not even have $500 to spend on a machine that's gonna stick around for at least five years? Psssh. That's $100 a year if divided up, and they should be able to recoup at least $200 if they sell it in three years.

I'm sure a price of $500 or so is fair. Less than that and you get a nasty cheapening effect that could affect performance and stability; more than that and you might as well just build a PC.
 
Aegir said:
As a pure PC hardware enthusiast, I'd for sure consider it reasonable to charge $500ish for a console.

That's the price of a very budgety DIY PC, so what's the problem? Do the proles not even have $500 to spend on a machine that's gonna stick around for at least five years? Psssh. That's $100 a year if divided up, and they should be able to recoup at least $200 if they sell it in three years.

I'm sure a price of $500 or so is fair. Less than that and you get a nasty cheapening effect that could affect performance and stability; more than that and you might as well just build a PC.
Click to expand...
$500 isn't much for grown adults that have real careers sure but it is for the general population. Too many people live pay check to pay check in the world. Kids to young adults and who are the primary target for console ain't swimming in money. Lots of parents don't understand why they need a PS5 when they already have a PS3. Just look how the Xbone $500 and the PS3 $500-600 price tags hurt their early sales.
 
Last edited:
Michael Pachter is good on a lot of things but he's historically wrong regarding Xbox, this "they can take the loss!" mentality was seen during the Xb1, thing is yes the full corporation technically could, but they won't since they see the division in an entirely different way, they care about the ecosystem not the hardware which is why going back to the Xb1 they didn't cut their price even when their console was much more significantly less powerful and more expensive than the competition (in the initial sdk you had to account for the kinect so 10% of the reduced gpu was set aside for the system, making it effectively 1.2 tf at 500$ VS 1.84 tf at 400$), so thinking that now that they have the more powerful cpu, gpu and slightly bigger (yet less performing) ssd they will take a money loss to undercut Sony is a pipe dream.
 
Marees said:
I had assumed all along that, since the Xbox1X debuted for $500, the Xbox sX also will launch with that same price. But what if MS is prepared to subsidize (further)?

Will Sony follow suit & match Microsoft?

https://www.thefpsreview.com/2020/0...-sonys-playstation-5-claims-industry-analyst/

During a recent episode of Bonus Round (via Pure Xbox) with games journalist Geoff Keighley, Aaron Greenberg (GM, Xbox Games Marketing), and Peter Moore (former Dreamcast, EA, and Xbox executive), Wedbush Securities analyst Michael Pachter claimed that Microsoft would be launching the Xbox Series X for just $400 this holiday.


Pachter said.
Click to expand...
Michael Pachter is an idiot. I don't know why people still listen to him.
 
vegeta535 said:
I though he fell off the face of the earth. Been a while I heard anything from that idiot.
Click to expand...
Last thing I heard before this was him calling Nintendo an idiot again for making the Switch. Prior to that he was predicting the end of video game consoles after the Xbox 360/PS3/Wii generation, going all in with streaming services. I think his biggest blunder before that was saying 2K was going to be bought out by EA, but not even EA's hostile takeover attempt went anywhere.
 
I cant wait for the 1st person to take a sledgehammer to it being it's pretty small should be fun to watch. I get more out of those videos then the last gen of consoles were used for gaming.
 
Armenius said:
Last thing I heard before this was him calling Nintendo an idiot again for making the Switch. Prior to that he was predicting the end of video game consoles after the Xbox 360/PS3/Wii generation, going all in with streaming services. I think his biggest blunder before that was saying 2K was going to be bought out by EA, but not even EA's hostile takeover attempt went anywhere.
Click to expand...
He said that about the Switch? I'm not surprised. The guy is a tool. https://www.extremetech.com/gaming/...has-now-outsold-the-n64-and-gamecube-combined
 
cybereality said:
From the developers that have talked publicly, PS5 has the better hardware (but not necessarily the "faster" on paper). So Sony could charge more, but it will hurt them.
Click to expand...
Got any sources for that? Is it just easier to program for?
 
kamikazi said:
Got any sources for that? Is it just easier to program for?
Click to expand...
I remember seeing something to that effect. I thought it was an Insomniac developer, but turns out it was a Crytek developer in a now removed interview. He said it was easier to achieve and sustain maximum performance on the PS5 compared to Series X.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Contr...elop-for-than-the-Xbox-Series-X.460026.0.html

Later retracted under mysterious circumstances:

https://www.windowscentral.com/crytek-engineer-claims-ps5-easier-develop-then-retracts-statement
 
Armenius said:
I remember seeing something to that effect. I thought it was an Insomniac developer, but turns out it was a Crytek developer in a now removed interview. He said it was easier to achieve and sustain maximum performance on the PS5 compared to Series X.
Click to expand...

A Crytek employee would know maximum performance, right?
 
Jaybone909 said:
He said that about the Switch? I'm not surprised. The guy is a tool. https://www.extremetech.com/gaming/...has-now-outsold-the-n64-and-gamecube-combined
Click to expand...
I was paraphrasing, but he was pretty much inline with the rest of the industry in their reaction to the Switch and said the "inevitable" lack of third-party support would kill the console. Hilarious thinking about it now with the large and still fast-expanding library on the Switch. He later said the launch price was "problematic" with a release slate of only 5 games.

https://www.mcvuk.com/business-news...blematic-and-launch-line-up-is-underwhelming/

Of course, now he's all-in on the Switch hype train after again becoming the best selling console in the current generation.
 
Armenius said:
I was paraphrasing, but he was pretty much inline with the rest of the industry in their reaction to the Switch and said the "inevitable" lack of third-party support would kill the console. Hilarious thinking about it now with the large and still fast-expanding library on the Switch. He later said the launch price was "problematic" with a release slate of only 5 games.

https://www.mcvuk.com/business-news...blematic-and-launch-line-up-is-underwhelming/

Of course, now he's all-in on the Switch hype train after again becoming the best selling console in the current generation.
Click to expand...
PS4 has like double the units sold over the switch.
 
Yes, I got it Pachter has no credibility.

But the feeling I got is that the demand situation is unprecedented. Paul Tassi from Forbes desribes it well:

I would not go so far as to say a $400 Xbox Series X is “likely,” and yet the more I think about it, the more I believe both the last console race and our current pandemic could create a situation where MS could pursue that price. But we’ll see soon enough, though maybe not that soon if Microsoft and Sony keep doing this dance.
Click to expand...

https://www.forbes.com/sites/paulta...possible-a-pandemic-and-revenge/#733b6f6c4d14

they are in a much better position to take a loss on Xbox Series X consoles by underpricing them than consumers are making the painful decision to shell out up to $600 for an extreme luxury good when they’re trying to recover from an economic disaster. And Microsoft is probably smart enough to realize that.
Click to expand...
 
Aegir said:
As a pure PC hardware enthusiast, I'd for sure consider it reasonable to charge $500ish for a console.
Click to expand...
As a PCMasterRace, I believe you to have too much money to burn.
That's the price of a very budgety DIY PC, so what's the problem? Do the proles not even have $500 to spend on a machine that's gonna stick around for at least five years? Psssh. That's $100 a year if divided up, and they should be able to recoup at least $200 if they sell it in three years.

I'm sure a price of $500 or so is fair. Less than that and you get a nasty cheapening effect that could affect performance and stability; more than that and you might as well just build a PC.
Click to expand...
The problem is that most people who buy consoles don't have that much disposable income. Also, our economy is currently in the toilet and probably won't recovery by the time the PS5 and Xbox Series X are released. If I were a console peasant who lost their job, I wouldn't be buying a $500 console. I'd probably keep my PS4 and play games on that until the PS5 is affordable.
 
Right, the cost isn't just $500. You also need to purchase a new game or two, maybe an extra controller as well. And then add sales tax and you are at $700 or so. That is a lot of money to fork over for a system that looks marginally better than the current consoles. Especially when the current gen consoles are around $200 brand new with a game included.
 
DukenukemX said:
As a PCMasterRace, I believe you to have too much money to burn.
Click to expand...

Oh no, it's just that my last build was about $1500, and that was in 2010, and I'm using it right now.
It's a hefty sum, but not so bad when divided over ten years or more. My next build will be in 2021 or even 2022. Unless this machine breaks for good first.

If consoles last 5 years or more, then $500 is still less than my PC, which I bought with teenage money.

Surely people budget for a TV, a game station, a laptop, a phone, and other entertainment technologies, right? People have to budget and save money to get the things they find important. I found both gaming, internet, and office work to be important, so I got a nice x58 PC to last me an eternity.

Spending 1/3 the price on a thing that will be relevant for 1/2 the time is rather reasonable. The math checks out. If it's subsidized by the games, then $400, $450, or $500 all seem like reasonable at-launch prices. Of course there's always a used market and late-game market too. People have options.
 
dan1 said:
Right, the cost isn't just $500. You also need to purchase a new game or two, maybe an extra controller as well. And then add sales tax and you are at $700 or so. That is a lot of money to fork over for a system that looks marginally better than the current consoles. Especially when the current gen consoles are around $200 brand new with a game included.
Click to expand...
Yea the PS5 is going to be more then marginally better then the 7 year old current gen base systems.
 
dan1 said:
Right, the cost isn't just $500. You also need to purchase a new game or two, maybe an extra controller as well. And then add sales tax and you are at $700 or so. That is a lot of money to fork over for a system that looks marginally better than the current consoles. Especially when the current gen consoles are around $200 brand new with a game included.
Click to expand...

double performance is only "marginally" better?

WTF crack are you smoking. 911 Turbo 0-60 time is only marginally better than a subaru forester by your numbers. Insane.
 
vegeta535 said:
$500 isn't much for grown adults that have real careers sure but it is for the general population. Too many people live pay check to pay check in the world. Kids to young adults and who are the primary target for console ain't swimming in money. Lots of parents don't understand why they need a PS5 when they already have a PS3. Just look how the Xbone $500 and the PS3 $500-600 price tags hurt their early sales.
Click to expand...

Its so out of touch to think that $500 is an issue, its been 5 years and almost everything else in life has gone up heavily in costs. parents buy kids consoles because its a cheap way out of buying them something better. As I have no one is going to bat an eye at $500 unless the competitor is $400. But if the competitor comes in at $500 no one will care, if the competitor comes in at $600 then the $500 console will fly off the shelves like nothing. Again with consoles the price is a way overblown issue.
 
rudy said:
Its so out of touch to think that $500 is an issue, its been 5 years and almost everything else in life has gone up heavily in costs. parents buy kids consoles because its a cheap way out of buying them something better. As I have no one is going to bat an eye at $500 unless the competitor is $400. But if the competitor comes in at $500 no one will care, if the competitor comes in at $600 then the $500 console will fly off the shelves like nothing. Again with consoles the price is a way overblown issue.
Click to expand...

Depends on consumer perception. Remember that for anything it isn't what someone CAN afford as much as what they WILL afford. If people feel something "isn't worth the money" then they don't buy it. Doesn't matter if they happily spend more money on something else. While I 100% agree that $500 is not a problematic amount for a console to cost, if consumers feel that is too much, then it is too much, even if the same consumer then goes and drops $1000 on a new phone every year.
 
Sycraft said:
Depends on consumer perception. Remember that for anything it isn't what someone CAN afford as much as what they WILL afford. If people feel something "isn't worth the money" then they don't buy it. Doesn't matter if they happily spend more money on something else. While I 100% agree that $500 is not a problematic amount for a console to cost, if consumers feel that is too much, then it is too much, even if the same consumer then goes and drops $1000 on a new phone every year.
Click to expand...

Consumer perception is that gaming is valuable. Again you are somewhat right but consumer perception is all about relative value in this case which is why I pointed out that it only matters what Sony and MS do in relation to each other. Its a little ridiculous to thin that consumers are going to lose their shit over a minor $100 increase in price. Will some bitch about it? Yes, but those same idiots who bitch about it will 99% go and buy one near launch. Most of them will be waiting in line or have the shit preordered.
 
rudy said:
Consumer perception is that gaming is valuable. Again you are somewhat right but consumer perception is all about relative value in this case which is why I pointed out that it only matters what Sony and MS do in relation to each other. Its a little ridiculous to thin that consumers are going to lose their shit over a minor $100 increase in price. Will some bitch about it? Yes, but those same idiots who bitch about it will 99% go and buy one near launch. Most of them will be waiting in line or have the shit preordered.
Click to expand...
Yea the problem is that the minority that will bitch are the loudest of them all. Then herd mentality becomes a think and can bury a product. It has happen in the past. People like to outrage and still go out and buy the product. I been very vocal about ff7 but yet I went out and got it. Do I regret it? Sure as hell do cause it sucked. But I still did and became part of the problem.
 
rudy said:
Consumer perception is that gaming is valuable. Again you are somewhat right but consumer perception is all about relative value in this case which is why I pointed out that it only matters what Sony and MS do in relation to each other. Its a little ridiculous to thin that consumers are going to lose their shit over a minor $100 increase in price. Will some bitch about it? Yes, but those same idiots who bitch about it will 99% go and buy one near launch. Most of them will be waiting in line or have the shit preordered.
Click to expand...
Just like cell phones.
 
Armenius said:
I remember seeing something to that effect. I thought it was an Insomniac developer, but turns out it was a Crytek developer in a now removed interview. He said it was easier to achieve and sustain maximum performance on the PS5 compared to Series X.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Contr...elop-for-than-the-Xbox-Series-X.460026.0.html

Later retracted under mysterious circumstances:

https://www.windowscentral.com/crytek-engineer-claims-ps5-easier-develop-then-retracts-statement
Click to expand...
I seem to remember hearing that the PS5's significantly faster storage would give it an advantage over the XBSX
 
Epos7 said:
I seem to remember hearing that the PS5's significantly faster storage would give it an advantage over the XBSX
Click to expand...
In theory, but I think the deficit in GPU horsepower is going to be more significant in practical terms as much as Sony has been pushing otherwise.
 
rudy said:
Consumer perception is that gaming is valuable. Again you are somewhat right but consumer perception is all about relative value in this case which is why I pointed out that it only matters what Sony and MS do in relation to each other. Its a little ridiculous to thin that consumers are going to lose their shit over a minor $100 increase in price. Will some bitch about it? Yes, but those same idiots who bitch about it will 99% go and buy one near launch. Most of them will be waiting in line or have the shit preordered.
Click to expand...

Nah, it isn't about what consumer's general attitude to a form of entertainment is, it is if they are willing to pay that much for a specific product and people can be real strange about that. You also find it can take nosedives at certain amounts, like you can sell something easy for $20 but try for $22 and suddenly 80% of your sales evaporate. It is something companies always have to research and consider with products.

Now I'm not saying consoles are going to run in to this problem, I'm just saying don't discount it. Don't think that $100 more is the kind of thing that won't matter to people because it absolutely can.
 
dan1 said:
Right, the cost isn't just $500. You also need to purchase a new game or two, maybe an extra controller as well. And then add sales tax and you are at $700 or so. That is a lot of money to fork over for a system that looks marginally better than the current consoles. Especially when the current gen consoles are around $200 brand new with a game included.
Click to expand...
Don't forget the monthly fee to play multiplayer games online.

Aegir said:
Oh no, it's just that my last build was about $1500, and that was in 2010, and I'm using it right now.
It's a hefty sum, but not so bad when divided over ten years or more. My next build will be in 2021 or even 2022. Unless this machine breaks for good first.

If consoles last 5 years or more, then $500 is still less than my PC, which I bought with teenage money.
Click to expand...
Most people can't afford to build a gaming PC from 2010 for $1500 and a $500 console in 2020. You know how many people game on something like a laptop with a Core2Duo? You know how few people buy graphic cards beyond $250?
Surely people budget for a TV, a game station, a laptop, a phone, and other entertainment technologies, right? People have to budget and save money to get the things they find important. I found both gaming, internet, and office work to be important, so I got a nice x58 PC to last me an eternity.
Click to expand...
You know what's the best way to save money? Don't spend money. I know, it's shocking. Especially with Microsoft and Sony planning to give PS4 and XB1 owners the ability to play the games they bought on the PS5 and XBX for no additional cost. Pretty much like on PC when you buy better hardware and games suddenly run better without requiring you to buy another game.

Spending 1/3 the price on a thing that will be relevant for 1/2 the time is rather reasonable. The math checks out. If it's subsidized by the games, then $400, $450, or $500 all seem like reasonable at-launch prices. Of course there's always a used market and late-game market too. People have options.
Click to expand...
Again, recession. Money is tight or possibly non-existing. A lot of people may find that it's better to save the money and continue to use a PS4 instead of upgrade to the PS5.

 
rudy said:
Its so out of touch to think that $500 is an issue, its been 5 years and almost everything else in life has gone up heavily in costs. parents buy kids consoles because its a cheap way out of buying them something better. As I have no one is going to bat an eye at $500 unless the competitor is $400. But if the competitor comes in at $500 no one will care, if the competitor comes in at $600 then the $500 console will fly off the shelves like nothing. Again with consoles the price is a way overblown issue.
Click to expand...
You say that but most consoles that failed have done so because the pricing was an issue. Or do you think the 3DO was a misunderstood console that people couldn't appreciate at $700 in 1993 money? It was technically superior to the Sega Genesis and Super Nintendo but nobody bought it. Or more recently the Xbox One which was $500 with the Kinect and then they removed the Kinect and brought the price down to $400. BUT... the PS4 was already $400 and superior in graphics. Today the Xbox One sells less hardware than the Nintendo Switch, which was released 4 years after the Xbox One.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top