Support NeoGAF

[Texas Pride]

Anyone buying this is crazy. No way will it be 500+. Digital version of the PS5 will be no more than 450.

 

[splattered]

Stop kidding yourself. Tell me, what new utility phones actually gained in the last 3-10 years that actually justify buying a new one for a high price. Al slightly better camera? Everything else that a smartphone can do is easily covered even by cheap androids today that cost less than 200 bucks( organisation of appointments,email, whats app, mobile internet etc.)

If you enjoy doing all of it slower and with shitty glitchy performance, sure.

 

[genesisblock]

$500 is the most realistic price range out there based on specs. Both SONY & MS dropped the ball on this by not advertising some "exclusive" feature that makes their consoles "next-gen" other than it's the end of a cycle. I for one would be more inclined to be bullish on the console price had they showed some example like The Order's graphics in an open world with gameplay fluidity as the TLOU2 in a multiplayer session. That right there would make me believe that this gen is truly reaching it's end.

 

[meech]

Stop kidding yourself. Tell me, what new utility phones actually gained in the last 3-10 years that actually justify buying a new one for a high price. Al slightly better camera? Everything else that a smartphone can do is easily covered even by cheap androids today that cost less than 200 bucks( organisation of appointments,email, whats app, mobile internet)

If you enjoy doing all of it slower and with shitty glitchy performance, sure.

If there is anything glitchy on a phone with a kirin 659 and 4 gb of ram(under 200 dollar), its the fault of really bad programmers, not the phone. And for sure no phone today has issues with whats app, mail and mobile surfing,even it its a really cheap china brand. And those are the apps the majority of people use their phones for, most of the time.

 

[Blond]

I mean what did you guys expect? You can't launch customized consoles that are better than anything on the market and not expect to pay up.

 

[killatopak]

I think context in today’s spending habits needs to be looked into.

Phones are super expensive and nobody bats an eye.

Also $600 in 2006 is different from $600 in 2020.

 

[Jigsaah]

If it's 700 for both systems im DEFINITELY goin with the PC upgrade

 

[RCU005]

Digital Foundry, the new Michael Pacther!

 

[Abear21]

MSRP, the S stands for Suggested, that’s my worry. If retailers are getting restocks of just a handful of consoles at a time and selling out immediately I would think we’ll see bundles or just price gouging.

I want to wish both consoles will be readily available this holiday, but with demand seemingly being through the roof and manufacturing/shipping not being 100% I think shortages will be more than likely. Everything costs more right now, I don’t see why console prices won’t follow that trend.

 

[BluRayHiDef]

You know what I think Sony and Microsoft are waiting for in order to reveal the prices of the PS5 and XSX and make them available for pre-order? I think that they're waiting for Congress to pass a second stimulus bill and therefore issue a second round of stimulus checks, because gamers will then impulsively use that money to buy at least one of the next-gen consoles.

Making the consoles available for pre-order when U.S. citizens, one of their largest consumer bases, all have at least $1200 of cash (or around half if they're a dependent) will maximize the number of pre-orders that would be made.

 

[gradient]

Right, fair enough, I shouldn't have said a small part of one's income. I'd have been better saying most people still have significant disposable income.

But that doesn't really change the point.

Fuck, you've already repeatedly acknowledged that lots of people spend loads on a phone, but somehow because that confers status that's somehow a more essential use of money than entertainment from a console. It's not, that's a pure value judgement.

THE POINT IS, IT'S ALL DISCRETIONARY SPENDING.

There's no fundamental reason why some people spend like $500 A YEAR on a phone but wouldn't spend $1000 every 7 years on a console. None. The status you get from an expensive phone isn't OBJECTIVELY more valuable than the fun you get from a console. It's entirely subjective. That's the essential point I'm trying to hammer through your skull.

I'm not even trying to say consoles would sell at a higher price. I doubt they would and there are complicated reasons for that's but AGAIN, the fact that they're 'just' entertainment isn't one of them. Because as I've tried to make clear numerous times, people spend a shitload on all kinds of entertainment, well in advance of the $100 a year or so a console costs.

Stop trying to pick a single element of the value proposition of a phone rather than looking at the total value proposition. It has a vastly greater utility, it provides what is now considered essential day to day functionality and as an expense it can be justified for entertainment, social, and (for many) work. Plus it has the benefit (rightly or wrongly) of serving as a fashion and status statement which is accessible in public and social situations.

A game console is an entertainment device, it's a toy. It can provide hours of entertainment for those that enjoy games but in terms of utility it can offer only a fraction of what the phone can. In terms of spending justification it has nothing "essential" about it. It's pure non-essential spending.

The fundamental reason why people would spend $500 a year on a phone and not $1000 with a recurring cost (games, accessories, online) of say $150 a year (assuming only 2 game purchases a year which would imply significantly less usage) is because the phone offers more. Yes, it offers objectively more.

The reason they're not comparable is because the phone is an essential and the games console is a toy. One offers a hell of a lot more to a far wider audience than the other.

And a console costs it's price of entry : Console + game + accessories (maybe). People don't see it's cost retrospectively after X years, they see it as the amount of money they have to put down on day 1. The cost of the console is that entry point + the ongoing cost of games, accessories, subscriptions and services - not $100 a year.

 

[Soodanim]

The price is fine, because I physically can’t fit it into my unit if the size calculations were correct. Slim will be smaller and cheaper.

 

[gradient]

Stop kidding yourself. Tell me, what new utility phones actually gained in the last 3-10 years that actually justify buying a new one for a high price. Al slightly better camera? Everything else that a smartphone can do is easily covered even by cheap androids today that cost less than 200 bucks( organisation of appointments,email, whats app, mobile internet etc.)

I'm not kidding myself. I think the prices of high end phones are unjustified and it's a game of diminishing returns beyond the $200 price point. But even those at $200 have a higher value proposition than a games console which is why if your price is too high and people have to choose between them, the console will lose. It's a choice console manufacturers can't afford to make people make.

 

[Thickandblack]

I always thought it would cost more then 500. Think about how much a GPU alone costs with similar power for PC. Then add everything else and there is no chance the Xbox at least would be under 500.

Could see
PS5 disc 499
PS5 disc-less 450
XBOX X 599 (with one year free gamepass)
XBOX S 399

Something like that. Microsoft has to toss in a value add due to the price difference and they are pushing Gamepass as the be all lately.

 

[Quantum253]

A PS5 costs roughly $450 to manufacture. I'm not sure if this is with the controller. If it isn't then the $500+ makes sense.

Also I find it really funny how people are willing to spend $700+ on a phone every 2-3 years but nothing more for than $500 for a console that they'll change in 5-7 years.

I recall conversations of how insane the iPhone X launch price of $999.99 was going to be. Most enthusiasts were going to pay regardless. Subsequently, I guess today's Galaxy Fold starting at $1,980 would be close to the same conversations. Now over $1,000 usd is the standard for most phones and haven't slowed the sales of most major flagship brands.
However, I still think consoles are still within a niche arena where over $600 still carries stigma, from PS3 launch, to appeal to the casual home console market. I think most enthusiasts will purchase Series-X/PS5 regardless of price because the perceived value of 4K/60fps/limited Ray-tracing under 1k. It will be a harder sale to the majority consumer base. However, games are still the major draw to hardware specifications since what's the point of hardware if the software doesn't reflect that same value?
I think if Msoft and Sony stay within the $500-$600 range, and offset the cost in subscription, add-ons and digital sales, the numbers could be close to acceptable for the majority market while presenting even more value to the enthusiasts.
Of course, I was the kid staring at the Neo-Geo and Panasonic 3DO in the 90s wondering who could afford $700 for a console too.

 

[Peenolia010]

Digital edition will be 499usd then.

No way they have everything out of mainstream budget.

I guess Sony could drop PS4 pro to 299 usd and keep going, since they don't have Lockhart.

PS4 Pro can't play all the games in the future the the PS5 can. I'm confused with this post.

 

[PSNplanetcolony]

Personally i paid 600 for Ps3 60gb on launch day, so id have no prob with 600. But rumored BOM around 500 means that will be the price. Standard 549, digital 499 possibly.

 

[Jaxcellent]

PS5 400 all digital, 499 with the drive, Sony know's 400 is the sweetspot, they learned this current gen.

Microsoft will undercut with a 299 lockheart, they will tell you its a good deal, but it really isnt. They will price sys X 499 because they need to match Playstation 5, and they see this as the X model, so 500 like the XboneX.

 

[yurinka]

I undertand that having Zen 2, RDNA2, fast SSD, 16GB of RAM, a fancy pad and so on their cost (not only manufacturing, but all) can be $600 or so, maybe even a bit more. But I think they will sell them at a loss at $499 (PS4DE $449, Series S $299 or $399).

Guys, the ones who expect a discless PS5 for $399 need to quit drugs. It's impossible. I also it's very dumb to expect consoles priced at $700. DF are just speculating.

 

[Abear21]

Guys I don’t want in on this argument but really, Who buys phones outright? Everyone I know just pays in their monthly bill and upgrades after a couple years.

I’d argue too that a console, while just a toy, does have other value too such as a Blu Ray player, Apps like Hulu, HBO max, and YouTube, not to mention being able to surf some “essential” websites without worry!

The real question as far as value is in backwards compatibility. This is the big question that hasn’t quite been answered clearly and fully by Sony yet.

 

[Hunnybun]

Stop trying to pick a single element of the value proposition of a phone rather than looking at the total value proposition. It has a vastly greater utility, it provides what is now considered essential day to day functionality and as an expense it can be justified for entertainment, social, and (for many) work. Plus it has the benefit (rightly or wrongly) of serving as a fashion and status statement which is accessible in public and social situations.

A game console is an entertainment device, it's a toy. It can provide hours of entertainment for those that enjoy games but in terms of utility it can offer only a fraction of what the phone can. In terms of spending justification it has nothing "essential" about it. It's pure non-essential spending.

The fundamental reason why people would spend $500 a year on a phone and not $1000 with a recurring cost (games, accessories, online) of say $150 a year (assuming only 2 game purchases a year which would imply significantly less usage) is because the phone offers more. Yes, it offers objectively more.

The reason they're not comparable is because the phone is an essential and the games console is a toy. One offers a hell of a lot more to a far wider audience than the other.

And a console costs it's price of entry : Console + game + accessories (maybe). People don't see it's cost retrospectively after X years, they see it as the amount of money they have to put down on day 1. The cost of the console is that entry point + the ongoing cost of games, accessories, subscriptions and services - not $100 a year.

Jesus man, this is exhausting.

Forget about the phone. The phone is just an example.

It could just as easily be eating out or going to music festivals or buying expensive clothes.

Most people spend more on those kinds of things than anyone spends on gaming. They're all just entertainment/leisure/fun. None of them offer any kind of practical benefit.

The value is all subjective, just as it is with a games console.

Some of these things are cheaper than a phone, all of them are cheaper than a car, and all of them are dearer than food. There's basically no correlation between usefulness and price.

You cant determine the value of a console simply by examining how praactically useful it is. I honestly don't understand why you find this so hard to grasp.

But hey, I can't wait for you to explain how eating out a few times a year offers objectively more value than a console. Should be a laugh, at least.

 

[Dabaus]

"Halo has been delayed, we havent seen a single game running on the the worlds most powerful console, but the ps5 will be 800 dollars." Digital Foundry

 

[KWAB]

I would like to know how they explain this then

Sony Boosting Output of PlayStation 5 to Meet Surge in Demand

Sony Corp. is roughly doubling its PlayStation 5 production to 10 million units this year as it sees the prolonged effects of the Covid-19 pandemic boosting demand for gaming, according to people familiar with its plans.

www.bloomberg.com

With a very high price there's no need to produce that many consoles. Someone here is wrong and I think it's Digital Foundry.

 

[gradient]

Jesus man, this is exhausting.

Forget about the phone. The phone is just an example.

It could just as easily be eating out or going to music festivals or buying expensive clothes.

Most people spend more on those kinds of things than anyone spends on gaming. They're all just entertainment/leisure/fun. None of them offer any kind of practical benefit.

The value is all subjective, just as it is with a games console.

Some of these things are cheaper than a phone, all of them are cheaper than a car, and all of them are dearer than food. There's basically no correlation between usefulness and price.

You cant determine the value of a console simply by examining how praactically useful it is. I honestly don't understand why you find this so hard to grasp.

But hey, I can't wait for you to explain how eating out a few times a year offers objectively more value than a console. Should be a laugh, at least.

You were the one trying to argue that a console is comparable to a phone in terms of value and justifiable price. then you flip-flopped to a services comparison and now you're trying to evade your original argument entirely and usnig cumulative social activities.

Your argument now essentially boils down to people should be willing to forgoe a social life and all cumulative non-essential activities in favor of buying what amounts to one toy. You're trying to compare cumulative spending of signifiantly smaller sums over time with a single major expenditure. That's more absurd than Sony's "get a second job" delusion with the PS3 and they got a well deserved reality check from that.

Peope spending money on social activities don't start out with a grand and then whittle it down. They spend it as they earn and the expenditure is in small amounts. It's easier and more justifiable because the up front expenditure for each is small and occurs over a period of time as the money comes in whereas the console costs a huge sum up front posing a barrier to entry and an immediate and obvious implication for other activities. It's really simple and the fact that you're deliberately trying disguise the cost issue of an expensive console as a restrospective cost spread across an assumed 7-10 years of use shows that you're aware of if but trying desperately to dance around it.

 

[EverydayBeast]

Consoles are sold in phases (high launch price, going down 3-4 years in and console manufacturers bring out lower priced consoles at the end of their life cycle) this price phase has been going on for years.

 

[TheGreatWhiteShark]

You know what I think Sony and Microsoft are waiting for in order to reveal the prices of the PS5 and XSX and make them available for pre-order? I think that they're waiting for Congress to pass a second stimulus bill and therefore issue a second round of stimulus checks, because gamers will then impulsively use that money to buy at least one of the next-gen consoles.

Making the consoles available for pre-order when U.S. citizens, one of their largest consumer bases, all have at least $1200 of cash (or around half if they're a dependent) will maximize the number of pre-orders that would be made.

and from preorder to November, what are they going to do? stay in the freezer? I mean, those who get the checks and have no money, probably are going to use the money, right?

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

Reposting this for relevance; explains pretty rationally where and why DF are hearing these MSRP prices for next-gen:

BOM without the controller is $450. With controller it's somewhere around $480. Add all the additional gross cost (engineering, assembly, shipping, marketing...) and they'd have to sell it at $599 to break even.

I don't think anyone else ITT is factoring that part into the equation.

 

[StateofMajora]

$700 with only 16gb of ram? SSD can't be that damn expensive. $600 for the ps5 would be surprising, but I could see it happening.

$700 for the series X makes a tad more sense considering they're making a cheaper S model but damn who the hell is going to buy the X model in that case? Some of us, sure but its adoption rate would be terrible.

 

[iorek21]

Next gen will end up costing up to $1000 here in Brazil, so not a surprising price for me.

But minimal wage here is $200, so there you have it...

 

[Hunnybun]

You were the one trying to argue that a console is comparable to a phone in terms of value and justifiable price. then you flip-flopped to a services comparison and now you're trying to evade your original argument entirely and usnig cumulative social activities.

Your argument now essentially boils down to people should be willing to forgoe a social life and all cumulative non-essential activities in favor of buying what amounts to one toy. You're trying to compare cumulative spending of signifiantly smaller sums over time with a single major expenditure. That's more absurd than Sony's "get a second job" delusion with the PS3 and they got a well deserved reality check from that.

Peope spending money on social activities don't start out with a grand and then whittle it down. They spend it as they earn and the expenditure is in small amounts. It's easier and more justifiable because the up front expenditure for each is small and occurs over a period of time as the money comes in whereas the console costs a huge sum up front posing a barrier to entry and an immediate and obvious implication for other activities. It's really simple and the fact that you're deliberately trying disguise the cost issue of an expensive console as a restrospective cost spread across an assumed 7-10 years of use shows that you're aware of if but trying desperately to dance around it.

Fucking hell, man, it's the same principle!!

Any discretionary spending is relevant to this discussion, be it a phone, partying, flash clothes, whatever.

I'm not trying to backtrack on anything, I'm trying various different ways to make you understand a simple point. And failing, clearly.

You're actually getting close to a reasonable point without realising it, btw.

One reason people might not be willing to spend more on a console is that it's a lump sum. That's definitely plausible. If they could offer the same thing at $15 a month or so that might be much more attractive.

That's a possibility. "It's a toy, not useful".... not so much.

 

[SaturnSaturn]

I mean Kenichiro Yoshida said last year that it is a niche product aimed at hardcore gamers, so i dont get why people instantly dismiss the notion that it might be over 500 dollars.

Sony Positions Next PlayStation for Hard-Core Gamers

Sony’s next-generation PlayStation is still more than a year away, but its marketing strategy against newcomers like Google is already clear: Focus on hard-core gamers who obsess over the latest features.

www.wsj.com

 

[WelshBluebird]

Reposting this for relevance; explains pretty rationally where and why DF are hearing these MSRP prices for next-gen:

I don't think anyone else ITT is factoring that part into the equation.

PS4 bom was $381. Barely under what it sold for. Assuming they do the same for PS5, that supports the $499 mark, not $599.

 

[Quantum253]

SSD can't be that damn expensive

I've been looking to see what the costs were, if I wanted to upgrade to a gen 4 Nvme m.2 that was capable of running on a PS5 (Sony still hasn't given the list of approved vendors/models) so I'm trying to get close.
A 1TB 4th gen 5,000 MB/s read m.2 drive is running $199.99 on Amazon right now. But since that's worth a < 200gb upgrade, the 2TB model costs $429.99. I imagine Sony isn't paying $200 consumer cost, but I can't imagine it's that much cheaper. I don't think I'm ready to drop almost $500 just on the ssd upgrade just yet.

Source:
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07TN1MNJ4/?tag=neogaf0e-20

 

[Musky_Cheese]

I am still team $399-$499. Digital being $399

 

[Shifty1897]

Time for me to dig up all my posts claiming the next gen consoles will be $500+ and quote the naysayers for a public shaming thread.

 

[THE:MILKMAN]

Here's a reminder of why talk of $599 doesn't make sense:



Note how Shawn lists all the bad things about PS3 and then says 'worst of all the price'.

I get why DF are losing the plot as this year has been bonkers all round and less than 3 months from launch we really know none of the details about the PS5 nor the games line-up for either console and of course pricing.

2020 will be a year for the history books that's for sure!

 

[StateofMajora]

I've been looking to see what the costs were, if I wanted to upgrade to a gen 4 Nvme m.2 that was capable of running on a PS5 (Sony still hasn't given the list of approved vendors/models) so I'm trying to get close.
A 1TB 4th gen 5,000 MB/s read m.2 drive is running $199.99 on Amazon right now. But since that's worth a < 200gb upgrade, the 2TB model costs $429.99. I imagine Sony isn't paying $200 consumer cost, but I can't imagine it's that much cheaper. I don't think I'm ready to drop almost $500 just on the ssd upgrade just yet.

Source:
https://www.amazon.com/Sabrent-Internal-Extreme-Performance-SB-ROCKET-NVMe4-1TB/dp/B07TN1MNJ4/ref=sr_1_3?crid=2K5SI12J8OK2L&dchild=1&keywords=1tb+nvme+gen+4&qid=1597352213&sprefix=1tb+nvme+,aps,215&sr=8-3&th=1

Yeah upgrading is going to be very expensive for a number of years.

I imagine most people are going to stick with the internal stick, and resort to storing the less used games on an external hdd.

 

[LateBloomer]

Anything under 500$ is good. Ill buy no matter what but 399$ is a sweet spot. 599+ and it better be a damn beast! Ps5 btw

 

[Paulxo87]

Both sides need to REVEAL THEIR FUCKING PRICING AND PRE ORDER STRATEGY WITHIN THE NEXT TWO WEEKS. Enough is enough already

 

[RPGCrazied]

$700 with games going up to $70 probably? Yeah, good luck with that.

 

[turntablekeepsonspinning]

I think context in today’s spending habits needs to be looked into.

Phones are super expensive and nobody bats an eye.

Also $600 in 2006 is different from $600 in 2020.

Smartphone sales have dropped quite a bit i believe over the past 2 years. People are holding on to their phones longer and there hasn't been any innovation.

Edit: I guess prices in $600 range and people will jump onto the product (smartphones that is) but the $1300 dollar range Apple and Samsung have been pushing people hesitate.

 

[Craig of War]

Damn 700 in a covid economy it DOA for both if true

 

[Quantum253]

Yeah upgrading is going to be very expensive for a number of years.

I imagine most people are going to stick with the internal stick, and resort to storing the less used games on an external hdd.

I think that's going to be my plan and hopefully Sony keeps that sweet PS+ 100GB cloud storage

 

[Iced Arcade]

Between 500 - 700. Fuck are the playing, the price is right?of course it's between 5 and 7

 

[Batiman]

Don’t mind paying 599 for the XSX and 499 for Ps5. Won’t pay more than that.

 

[Oppoi]

This headline is like BAD! BAD!!! BAAAD NEWS SONY!!!..........





(same applies to Xbox)

 

[Patterson]

I love how this is always mentioned but ignores the fact that very few phones are actually purchased outright but are financed over a 2 year contract/lease.
Until I see that option with consoles, paying for phones and consoles is not an apples to apples comparison.

Ive heard for years that MS was implementing something like that with Xbox Live, but it still hasn’t happened.

There’s this thing, it’s called a credit card. You make monthly payments over time.

 

[Deto]

DF in 2019:

Without RT
Without SSD
8TF RDNA1 (5700XT)

Now:

700 USD

 

[gradient]

Fucking hell, man, it's the same principle!!

Any discretionary spending is relevant to this discussion, be it a phone, partying, flash clothes, whatever.

I'm not trying to backtrack on anything, I'm trying various different ways to make you understand a simple point. And failing, clearly.

You're actually getting close to a reasonable point without realising it, btw.

One reason people might not be willing to spend more on a console is that it's a lump sum. That's definitely plausible. If they could offer the same thing at $15 a month or so that might be much more attractive.

That's a possibility. "It's a toy, not useful".... not so much.

You have no point. You're flip-flopping between arguments and disingenuous comparisons trying to justify something that just can't find any rationale for.

It's a toy. You may dislike the term, but that's what it is. It's not comparable to a phone which even on the low end offers significatly more utility and a higher value proposition. It's not comparable to a service like Netflix nor is the price equivalent to the consumer by bending time and trying to present the cumulative cost of a service over time with the downpayment required to buy a product. And it's not comparable to miscellaneous social activities if grouped and costed over years while disingenously presenting the cost of the product spread across presumed years of use despite it requiring an up front payment.

Try putting your arguments into marketing form and see how well they'd go down

Playstation - only $100 a year*
*Cost assuming 10 years of use. Up front payment of $1000 required. Additional recurring costs may apply.

Playstation: Cheaper than 10 years of Netflix*
*May not apply if additonal software, accessories or services are purchased. Requires additional software.

Playstation: it's us or everything else you love

Playstation: Yours for sacrifice and future bucks*
*IOU's not accepted

 

[lmimmfn]

Will wait till its 3 fiddy