• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

ELDEN RING is the best selling title of February 2022 and the best selling game of 2022 so far in the US

Well, I don't do hoping or wishing for acquisitions, not my bag. But if they just so happen to acquire FromSoft, yes they'll have had a lot of legacy and preexisting working relationship with them to where workplace culture-wise they'd blend right in with Sony's other teams.

There's a good chance it could happen but again, I personally don't like talking about acquisitions unless/until they are officially announced.

It would be the best move for everyone. Imagine From games being able to match Demon’s Souls fidelity and performance along with their current art direction?
 
Last edited:

Mozza

Gold Member
But Vita was a catch-22. The proprietary storage format made people not want to support it. Considering the PSP sold 80+ million, it's obvious Vita's failure wasn't so much due to natural dropoff but because Sony themselves screwed something up majorly along the way.

There aren't any conditions in the market where they'd need to risk making that type of design decision screw-up again.



Dude there are a good lot of people who would like a new portable from Sony. Besides, a new Sony portable would potentially light a fire under Nintendo's rear to innovate again with their hardware designs. People always say Sony needs a viable competitor in Microsoft to keep them honest, why is Nintendo exempt from similar? Why should Nintendo failing with a console every other gen (Wii U being the last one) be the catalyst for them to do better with successor hardware? Why would people want Nintendo to risk that happening?

And that's considering a new Sony portable would even be positioned as its own unique device. I'm really just proposing something with PS4 level performance in portable form, for people to take their PS4 library on-the-road, and possibly also stream PS5 games to, potentially opening the brand up for a new market segment that doesn't have to "beat" Nintendo to be successful. It'd serve a specific niche and act as another revenue stream off hardware sales alone, and possibly gain back some Japanese and smaller global indie support that might've gone Nintendo & mobile-only the past decade.

By your logic, there's no reason for a new Xbox, simply because they've been outsold by PlayStation. If Xbox doesn't need to "mop the floor" with PlayStation in console sales to be viable, Sony doesn't need to "mop the floor" with Nintendo in portable sales to have a sustainable portable platform.



Again, you're mistaking me thinking Sony should make a Vita 2. When I say "Sony portable", I mean something with a specific market niche aimed mainly at portable PS4 gaming on-the-go, serving as a streaming option for PS5 games either via Remote Play or through the cloud. If the Spartacus rumors end up true, it could be a great means of modern portability for PS1, PS2, PS3, PSP and PS Vita games, running either locally or streamed. It could even act as a benefit for PSVR2.

And possibly, for developers who still want to develop cross-gen games for PS4 and PS5 a while longer, it could give them a larger market segment for PS4 version of those games since a new portable offering native PS4 performance and compatibility gives that game a new way to be played, via in portable format on a dedicated portable device. PS4 is still selling strong at $299 and that's at a for-profit MSRP. Depending on volume of production for a portable, they could price it at $299 two years from now (when it'd launch) at slight profit, or potentially a higher price like $349 or $399 depending on certain features, or even $249 if they wanted to be very aggressive with large volumes (though I don't see that being a likely price point).

This strategy basically means Sony wouldn't need to make content specifically for the portable; think of it how Nintendo handles software development for the Switch. That's a hybrid system so it's technically a portable & a home console (when docked), but they aren't making a specific Mario platformer for the portable and another for the console. It's the same one game, you can just choose to play it on a docked console or take it on the go.

Same strategy here for Sony, except now you're talking about software already made with cross-gen in mind, that can either run on a dedicated console (PS4, PS4 Pro, PS5) or a portable (a new Sony portable). Current-gen games could run on the portable via Remote Play or cloud streaming. That way developers can still focus on just one hardware spec (PS5) and Remote Play/cloud streaming will handle functionality of that game on the portable device.

As for the purpose, well I just went over use-cases, but if you want some comparisons, it's basically a cross between Microsoft's strategy with the XBO and Series S. For current-gen MS games going forward, play on XBO systems is going to be handled via the cloud streaming. For Series S, native downscaled versions are made. Sony may not want to complicate the dev pipeline with yet another device that would need a native port, but if it's capable enough for Remote Play and cloud streaming, that brings in a value proposition for people who may want to take their PS5 content on the road as long as they're okay with cloud streaming (or Remote Play, including maybe a way where remote PS5s can act as access server points for user library content if they back that content/library up to the cloud).



I don't see how Japan is "lost" to Sony necessarily when they're already at 1+ million there, and they've signed commercial contracts with the biggest pop star in the country. The way this generation's going, if they keep pace with unit deliveries they should at least match PS4's numbers in the region. But supposing they can't, and supposing that market is open for a portable that could provide streaming of PS5 software content (as well as portability for PS4 games), then a new portable device would be a great option to have.

Sony may not necessarily want or need such a portable device, whose main purpose is to extend functionality and use-cases of legacy software content (and provide streaming of new software content), to sell in volumes similar to what the PSP did in its day. Basically, take what volume numbers they have for the PS4, and convert them to this hypothetical device. That's what possible numbers would potentially look like, especially if they place it as something with decent profit margins (at $349 - $399, it would definitely provide good profit margins off the hardware alone, mimicking Nintendo's strategy). In actuality they would likely sell notably higher numbers than that.



And if Sony can provide more PS5 units of manufacture to meet that demand, then the portable idea becomes redundant. But if that can't happen, then possibly a portable can fit into the picture.



Products don't always bomb because they're bad ideas, but rather they could have been introduced at the wrong time, or marketed the wrong way. Pricing, etc. could have been culprits. A new portable device with Vita's strengths and none of its weaknesses could possibly find good market success in today's market, especially since it's mainly going to serve as a means for functionality of legacy content.



It's a bit disingenuous to use Stadia as an example for why Sony's approach wouldn't work. Stadia had marketing issues, pricing issues, and nowhere near the brand power of PlayStation or a company behind it with even a fraction of gaming market experience as Sony.



People opting for a Series S or X, as you even said, doesn't mean they won't pick up a PS5 when it becomes available and they're able to buy one. Also, console sales maybe not meeting targets due to manufacturing constraints doesn't mean Sony are losing money, which is ultimately what's most important here. Even with having to cut down expected PS5 production numbers last year, they reach a new fiscal year revenue for the division of $27 billion.

That means people in the ecosystem of PS5s are mainly those willing to buy a lot of software, and are the ones with the highest attach ratios. Those still on PS4, apparently it's a good lot of them still buying software for it, and those that are, are also most likely to invest in a PS5 once it's available. In a way not being able to meet even higher manufacturing targets for PS5s is a bit of a benefit since it means reduced operating income for the PlayStation division, and again even in spite of that they've been able to set higher and higher revenue and profit margins every quarter.

It's almost as if console sales aren't the most important thing at play here, and I know I've said this before about Xbox. Not going to suddenly say something different now that Sony's the subject, though yes I'm sure they would like to manufacture more consoles and are itching at the chance to be able to do so.



Except we already have examples where Series X clearly is not the target platform. Actually, it's not even so much about the target platform, but whether the platform which is the target is able to be leveraged by the developer to maximize what's delivered, and a lot of that comes down to developer competency along with tool optimizations.

And I guess for that, yes we'll have to see what happens. We should probably be asking ourselves how the power in these machines will be leveraged because if we're talking about anything beyond texture resolutions, framerates or output resolution targets, the computational differences between the Series S GPU and Series X GPU DO begin to come into the picture as a potential complication which could cut down on games leveraging that type of computational power in Series X for things like asynchronous compute tasks, because the Series S's GPU simply has less CUs to work with.

Therefore any game logic or tasks needing X amount of GPU computational resources for asynchronous compute tasks, will always have X less resources for the task on Series S than the Series X. I mentioned a long time ago that maybe some of these type of tasks can be scaled in volume for the smaller GPU, and I still think that may end up being the case. If so, then my concerns on this topic are unnecessary. However, I do need to at least see a game release demonstrating these ideas/theories in practice in order to prove such to be the case, and we haven't had one yet.

Let's hope Starfield is the first such example, though that's doubtful given they probably would have only stopped work on multiconsole development sometime in 2021, once the deal actually closed, and therefore focus on such versions up to that point might've prevented focus on the things I've been discussing in the past couple paragraphs.



Actually no they haven't quite. At various points last year Series X was VASTLY undersupplied compared to demand, and we know this because Microsoft were taking some of those Series X units for their own Azure servers. This didn't start to cease until late Summer last year.

If Sony really are expanding their cloud capacities for bigger server loads, that means they'd have to divert some PS5s to said server clusters (even if they're using Azure, which IIRC they still aren't quite doing yet). If they can only secure say 20% more wafers when adding on a Series S-style model to the product line, and they need 20% of their PS5s manufactured to go into servers, that reduces PS5s for the consumer market to 80%, when it could've been 100%. If demand is already at, say, 150%, then in this example they're underserving demand by 70% when they could've reduced that amount to 30%.

If only a fraction of, say, 5% out of that want a PS5 Series S-style device, now Sony have a 15% oversupply of that model, that could end up selling way more slowly (relatively speaking) than if those were PS5 models. It's a complicated logistics game to manage, and the customer base in Sony's domain in terms of early-gen adopters may not have the same preferences on that front as those Microsoft could be targeting.



I'm saying that by the time they may be able to increase PS5 Digital volume at mass, they could potentially reduce the price slightly to put pressure on Series S pricing, as long as it would mean Sony doesn't lose a lot of money on PS5 Digital as a result.



PS Classic was a cluster because of the selection partly, and also because of technical issues with the emulator used. That has no bearing on a new portable initiative in all honesty. I'm glad you mentioned PC, because that IS another option.

However, because Sony wouldn't want to risk reducing loss of percentage cuts from 3P software in the PlayStation ecosystem due to PS power users jumping to PC for content if it were provided Day 1 (as an example), they in fact won't do Day 1 for the majority of their titles, IMO, until they can secure their own storefront and monetize it (through subscription types, and/or ad-supported model too) outside of just pure software sales.

And I honestly don't think they would ever do Day 1 in a sense of all 1P in a subscription service the way Microsoft does with GamePass, not unless they can do so on a per-game basis, likely through game-specific contract-based subscriptions with monthly payment fees up until the cost of the software is paid off for. It is probably the best option for Day 1 into a service for new 1P software for Sony and other major 3P releases TBH, in a means that Sony can sustain and make work for their size and business strategy (they aren't like Microsoft where potential losses in software sales and such can be tanked by sheer corporate size and other divisions pulling in magnitudes more revenue & profit).



I think we'll just need to agree to disagree here because you've really missed my point on the actual use-cases for this hypothetical Sony portable.

However if we're on the subject of a PS5 "Series S" that could potentially feasibly work, I think there is an option: keep PS5 performance targets (10.23 TF, same pixel/texture fillrate, geometry culling/rasterization rate, RT perf, RAM capacity, bandwidth, SSD I/O etc.), remove the Blu-Ray drive and skip the internal NAND for everything but a chip for OS restore partition.

Instead, just use an M.2 SSD with about 128 GB of storage, and let it be upgradable same as regular PS5's. Also perhaps have it operate at more modest performance levels, but again since it'd be upgradeable it would not be a too big an issue because the SSD I/O still has the exact same performance as the regular PS5's. That probably allows them to mass-produce the PS5 Digital with much better margins (they at most lose only a fraction on each unit sold) and can keep it at $399, potentially even $349 a little while later possibly timed with a price cut of PS5 physical to $449 (you wouldn't see these price cuts for either PS5 until probably late 2024 at earliest, or even later than that in all honesty).
Dedicated handhelds sales were in decline, the DS sold 150 million and the 3DS sold around 75 million, so you can see why Sony wanted out, and even Nintendo had to change their plans.
 

Lognor

Member
Dude there are a good lot of people who would like a new portable from Sony. Besides, a new Sony portable would potentially light a fire under Nintendo's rear to innovate again with their hardware designs. People always say Sony needs a viable competitor in Microsoft to keep them honest, why is Nintendo exempt from similar? Why should Nintendo failing with a console every other gen (Wii U being the last one) be the catalyst for them to do better with successor hardware? Why would people want Nintendo to risk that happening?
No there isn't. You have not provided a solid answer as to what has changed in the decade since the Vita was a colossal failure. Oh, they don't "have" to use proprietary media anymore? That's it?! They didn't need to use it for the Vita either! They chose to use it! And like I said, that was not the only issue the Vita had. It had a number of issues. People just were not interested in a portable PS device. They still aren't! You are not speaking for the collective. You are a huge Sony fan; I get it. Sure, you would buy it. But I bet you also preordered the PS Classic as soon as you were able to! And we know how that turned out. You probably thought it would be a huge success. You don't have a clue.

And how do you figure a PS portable would "light a fire under Nintendo's rear"? Did the Vita? The Vita was significantly more powerful than the 3ds. What did the Vita push Nintendo to do? Absolutely nothing! The way less powerful 3ds still easily outsold the Vita. Nintendo didn't think twice about the Vita. I'm not saying Nintendo doesn't need competition. Competition is great. But Nintendo would not see competition from a portable PS device. They never have in the past. They won't start now. Mobile is Nintendo's primary competition.
And that's considering a new Sony portable would even be positioned as its own unique device. I'm really just proposing something with PS4 level performance in portable form, for people to take their PS4 library on-the-road, and possibly also stream PS5 games to, potentially opening the brand up for a new market segment that doesn't have to "beat" Nintendo to be successful. It'd serve a specific niche and act as another revenue stream off hardware sales alone, and possibly gain back some Japanese and smaller global indie support that might've gone Nintendo & mobile-only the past decade.
So this hypothetical PS portable would not get new content? It would primarily be to play PS4 games portably? And maybe stream PS5 games? Yeah, that's a no sale for most people. Again, I'm sure you would preorder day one and be super excited for it. Most people would not. People who want to play those PS4 games already did...on the PS4. Replaying them portably is a neat gimmick, I guess. But there has got to be more. It would need a lot of new content, which Sony would not be able to deliver on. They are solely focused on the PS5. Imagine if Sony started diverting resources from Naughty Dog, Insomniac, Guerilla, etc to make games for this hypothetical portable device. The Sony faithful would be PISSED! "What about my PS5 games?" "I don't want to play PS4 games anymore." "I want 4k, ray tracing, fast loading times, etc." It would be UGLY.
By your logic, there's no reason for a new Xbox, simply because they've been outsold by PlayStation. If Xbox doesn't need to "mop the floor" with PlayStation in console sales to be viable, Sony doesn't need to "mop the floor" with Nintendo in portable sales to have a sustainable portable platform.
There is a difference between what Microsoft is doing with the Xbox and what Sony did/will do with a portable device. The Vita LOST money. If the Xbox division was consistently losing money Microsoft would shutter it. But they're not. Or they see long term profitability in that division. Sony has obviously done the math and they don't see success with a portable device. Been there, done that. Failed. Time to move on! They have a super successful home console. Their portables failed. Why would they revisit that when essentially nothing has changed since their last failed portable?
Again, you're mistaking me thinking Sony should make a Vita 2. When I say "Sony portable", I mean something with a specific market niche aimed mainly at portable PS4 gaming on-the-go, serving as a streaming option for PS5 games either via Remote Play or through the cloud. If the Spartacus rumors end up true, it could be a great means of modern portability for PS1, PS2, PS3, PSP and PS Vita games, running either locally or streamed. It could even act as a benefit for PSVR2.
And like I said, very few people would be interested in replaying PS4 games on a portable device. Now, if you could stream those games to a mobile device that might be something. But dedicated hardware for that purpose? Nah. Sony is not going to gatekeep millions of people by requiring them to purchase a dedicated device to stream content when Microsoft is offering that on mobile devices. It's a huge barrier of entry for Sony if they went that route. And the Vita allowed remote play. No one cared! Why would people care now? Hint: they wouldn't!
And possibly, for developers who still want to develop cross-gen games for PS4 and PS5 a while longer, it could give them a larger market segment for PS4 version of those games since a new portable offering native PS4 performance and compatibility gives that game a new way to be played, via in portable format on a dedicated portable device. PS4 is still selling strong at $299 and that's at a for-profit MSRP. Depending on volume of production for a portable, they could price it at $299 two years from now (when it'd launch) at slight profit, or potentially a higher price like $349 or $399 depending on certain features, or even $249 if they wanted to be very aggressive with large volumes (though I don't see that being a likely price point).
If you made this argument 3-4 years ago, *maybe* (but still probably not). But now you're talking about a device that might receive new content for another year or two? That's not a great value proposition. We know that developers, by and large, will migrate to current gen only in the next year or two. Sure you will still get a small number of PS4 titles releasing after that, but most will have moved on. So most people would not be interested in a portable device that will stop receiving NEW content in the next year or two. New content is king. Legacy software is great as has been shown with BC, but people still want new games more than anything. And this hypothetical device has a shelf life of receiving new content of 1-2 years. Nah, hard pass for most!
This strategy basically means Sony wouldn't need to make content specifically for the portable; think of it how Nintendo handles software development for the Switch. That's a hybrid system so it's technically a portable & a home console (when docked), but they aren't making a specific Mario platformer for the portable and another for the console. It's the same one game, you can just choose to play it on a docked console or take it on the go.
But Nintendo is SOLELY focused on the Switch. Sony would not be solely focused on this portable device. Nintendo was unable to make enough content for both the 3ds and Wii U and hence why they migrated their home and portable units to make ONE device. What makes you think Sony can support two devices when Nintendo can't? Nintendo releases significantly more games every year than Sony. But you think Sony could support both? Or no, you don't think this portable would receive any new content (other than maybe streaming PS5 games....but you might actually need to own a PS5 to do remote play???). It's a lose/lose situation here.
Same strategy here for Sony, except now you're talking about software already made with cross-gen in mind, that can either run on a dedicated console (PS4, PS4 Pro, PS5) or a portable (a new Sony portable). Current-gen games could run on the portable via Remote Play or cloud streaming. That way developers can still focus on just one hardware spec (PS5) and Remote Play/cloud streaming will handle functionality of that game on the portable device.
Not that many people care to play old games and we know cross gen games are ending sooner rather than later. So this device wouldn't have a single exclusive and that new content would dry up in a year or two? And all this for $300+?! Where do I sign up?! /s
As for the purpose, well I just went over use-cases, but if you want some comparisons, it's basically a cross between Microsoft's strategy with the XBO and Series S. For current-gen MS games going forward, play on XBO systems is going to be handled via the cloud streaming. For Series S, native downscaled versions are made. Sony may not want to complicate the dev pipeline with yet another device that would need a native port, but if it's capable enough for Remote Play and cloud streaming, that brings in a value proposition for people who may want to take their PS5 content on the road as long as they're okay with cloud streaming (or Remote Play, including maybe a way where remote PS5s can act as access server points for user library content if they back that content/library up to the cloud).
It is not the same strategy as Microsoft. The Series S and Series X play the same games! They are current gen devices. This PS portable you're describing is a last gen device. It will not natively play current gen games. It will play last gen games and *maybe* allow you to stream PS5 games. I'm sure some people would love this idea, but most would not. Sony made a device in the Vita that was supposed to appeal to a lot of people. It didn't. This device you're speaking of is extremely niche and is guaranteed to sell less than the Vita.
I don't see how Japan is "lost" to Sony necessarily when they're already at 1+ million there, and they've signed commercial contracts with the biggest pop star in the country. The way this generation's going, if they keep pace with unit deliveries they should at least match PS4's numbers in the region. But supposing they can't, and supposing that market is open for a portable that could provide streaming of PS5 software content (as well as portability for PS4 games), then a new portable device would be a great option to have.
I don't see any way that the PS5 matches the PS4 numbers in Japan. But the gen is still early. We will revisit this often as this gen progresses.
Sony may not necessarily want or need such a portable device, whose main purpose is to extend functionality and use-cases of legacy software content (and provide streaming of new software content), to sell in volumes similar to what the PSP did in its day. Basically, take what volume numbers they have for the PS4, and convert them to this hypothetical device. That's what possible numbers would potentially look like, especially if they place it as something with decent profit margins (at $349 - $399, it would definitely provide good profit margins off the hardware alone, mimicking Nintendo's strategy). In actuality they would likely sell notably higher numbers than that.
$349 to $399?! LOL. Yeah, that would be DOA.
Products don't always bomb because they're bad ideas, but rather they could have been introduced at the wrong time, or marketed the wrong way. Pricing, etc. could have been culprits. A new portable device with Vita's strengths and none of its weaknesses could possibly find good market success in today's market, especially since it's mainly going to serve as a means for functionality of legacy content.
But it won't have the Vita's strengths! The Vita's strength was that it received NEW, EXCLUSIVE content. This hypothetical device you speak up might receive new content for the next year or two, but once cross gen games dry up that's bye bye new content. And it will not receive a single exclusive title. Don't exclusives matter? Not receiving new, exclusive content is a MASSIVE weakness. Maybe this new device does Steam Deck numbers, but that would be a colossal failure for Sony.
It's a bit disingenuous to use Stadia as an example for why Sony's approach wouldn't work. Stadia had marketing issues, pricing issues, and nowhere near the brand power of PlayStation or a company behind it with even a fraction of gaming market experience as Sony.
It sounds like Sony would have pricing issues too if you're suggesting they charge $400 for this device! And Sony had the brand power when they released the Vita and we know how that turned out. And Nintendo had the brand power and even more market experience than Sony when they released the Wii U and we know how that turned out too! You can't just throw shit at a wall and expect success based on your prior successes or your market experience. That's now how it works. Even the PS3 was a huge falling off from where the PS2 was. And Sony had a wealth of experience and brand power. What happened?! (rhetorical question, no need to answer)
People opting for a Series S or X, as you even said, doesn't mean they won't pick up a PS5 when it becomes available and they're able to buy one. Also, console sales maybe not meeting targets due to manufacturing constraints doesn't mean Sony are losing money, which is ultimately what's most important here. Even with having to cut down expected PS5 production numbers last year, they reach a new fiscal year revenue for the division of $27 billion.
But they are losing the money they could have made had their supply been better. So yeah, they've lost money in that sense. And yeah, I'm sure a lot of people that picked up a Series console will also buy a PS5 at a future date. But not everyone will. That's my point.
I'm saying that by the time they may be able to increase PS5 Digital volume at mass, they could potentially reduce the price slightly to put pressure on Series S pricing, as long as it would mean Sony doesn't lose a lot of money on PS5 Digital as a result.
That still doesn't make sense for Sony to do. You've talked about how Sony has been able to maximize profits. That's their end goal. So why would they lower the price on their digital console, which would lower revenues, to "put pressure on the Series S pricing?" Why does Sony need to put pressure on Microsoft. LOL. They've always set their own terms. When the Xbox One dropped its price not long after launch did Sony follow suit? No. They have no need to. Sony isn't worried about putting pressure on Microsoft. That's nuts!
However if we're on the subject of a PS5 "Series S" that could potentially feasibly work, I think there is an option: keep PS5 performance targets (10.23 TF, same pixel/texture fillrate, geometry culling/rasterization rate, RT perf, RAM capacity, bandwidth, SSD I/O etc.), remove the Blu-Ray drive and skip the internal NAND for everything but a chip for OS restore partition.

Instead, just use an M.2 SSD with about 128 GB of storage, and let it be upgradable same as regular PS5's. Also perhaps have it operate at more modest performance levels, but again since it'd be upgradeable it would not be a too big an issue because the SSD I/O still has the exact same performance as the regular PS5's. That probably allows them to mass-produce the PS5 Digital with much better margins (they at most lose only a fraction on each unit sold) and can keep it at $399, potentially even $349 a little while later possibly timed with a price cut of PS5 physical to $449 (you wouldn't see these price cuts for either PS5 until probably late 2024 at earliest, or even later than that in all honesty).
Yeah, I'll agree with this. This is a better solution than a Sony portable. Now whether that allows them to manufacture more units or not, I'm not sure. But right now with their current consoles Sony will be facing supply issues for at least the rest of the year. And we know the Series S consoles are lining shelves EVERYWHERE. Sony can't be happy about that.
 

SkylineRKR

Member
A FROM game never ran this well though. Remember the launches of DeS, DS1-3 on their native systems? Bloodborne? They all ran terrible and they had awful load times. Its sad that FROM can't go the extra mile, and deliver a locked 60fps PS5 app, with optional haptic and all. But I expected a game that was technically inferior to the DeS remaster. You won't get better out of FROM than this.

Ultimately it doesn't really matter. I like this more than DeS.
 
No there isn't. You have not provided a solid answer as to what has changed in the decade since the Vita was a colossal failure. Oh, they don't "have" to use proprietary media anymore? That's it?! They didn't need to use it for the Vita either! They chose to use it! And like I said, that was not the only issue the Vita had. It had a number of issues. People just were not interested in a portable PS device. They still aren't! You are not speaking for the collective. You are a huge Sony fan; I get it. Sure, you would buy it. But I bet you also preordered the PS Classic as soon as you were able to! And we know how that turned out. You probably thought it would be a huge success. You don't have a clue.

And how do you figure a PS portable would "light a fire under Nintendo's rear"? Did the Vita? The Vita was significantly more powerful than the 3ds. What did the Vita push Nintendo to do? Absolutely nothing! The way less powerful 3ds still easily outsold the Vita. Nintendo didn't think twice about the Vita. I'm not saying Nintendo doesn't need competition. Competition is great. But Nintendo would not see competition from a portable PS device. They never have in the past. They won't start now. Mobile is Nintendo's primary competition.

So this hypothetical PS portable would not get new content? It would primarily be to play PS4 games portably? And maybe stream PS5 games? Yeah, that's a no sale for most people. Again, I'm sure you would preorder day one and be super excited for it. Most people would not. People who want to play those PS4 games already did...on the PS4. Replaying them portably is a neat gimmick, I guess. But there has got to be more. It would need a lot of new content, which Sony would not be able to deliver on. They are solely focused on the PS5. Imagine if Sony started diverting resources from Naughty Dog, Insomniac, Guerilla, etc to make games for this hypothetical portable device. The Sony faithful would be PISSED! "What about my PS5 games?" "I don't want to play PS4 games anymore." "I want 4k, ray tracing, fast loading times, etc." It would be UGLY.

There is a difference between what Microsoft is doing with the Xbox and what Sony did/will do with a portable device. The Vita LOST money. If the Xbox division was consistently losing money Microsoft would shutter it. But they're not. Or they see long term profitability in that division. Sony has obviously done the math and they don't see success with a portable device. Been there, done that. Failed. Time to move on! They have a super successful home console. Their portables failed. Why would they revisit that when essentially nothing has changed since their last failed portable?

And like I said, very few people would be interested in replaying PS4 games on a portable device. Now, if you could stream those games to a mobile device that might be something. But dedicated hardware for that purpose? Nah. Sony is not going to gatekeep millions of people by requiring them to purchase a dedicated device to stream content when Microsoft is offering that on mobile devices. It's a huge barrier of entry for Sony if they went that route. And the Vita allowed remote play. No one cared! Why would people care now? Hint: they wouldn't!

If you made this argument 3-4 years ago, *maybe* (but still probably not). But now you're talking about a device that might receive new content for another year or two? That's not a great value proposition. We know that developers, by and large, will migrate to current gen only in the next year or two. Sure you will still get a small number of PS4 titles releasing after that, but most will have moved on. So most people would not be interested in a portable device that will stop receiving NEW content in the next year or two. New content is king. Legacy software is great as has been shown with BC, but people still want new games more than anything. And this hypothetical device has a shelf life of receiving new content of 1-2 years. Nah, hard pass for most!

But Nintendo is SOLELY focused on the Switch. Sony would not be solely focused on this portable device. Nintendo was unable to make enough content for both the 3ds and Wii U and hence why they migrated their home and portable units to make ONE device. What makes you think Sony can support two devices when Nintendo can't? Nintendo releases significantly more games every year than Sony. But you think Sony could support both? Or no, you don't think this portable would receive any new content (other than maybe streaming PS5 games....but you might actually need to own a PS5 to do remote play???). It's a lose/lose situation here.

Not that many people care to play old games and we know cross gen games are ending sooner rather than later. So this device wouldn't have a single exclusive and that new content would dry up in a year or two? And all this for $300+?! Where do I sign up?! /s

It is not the same strategy as Microsoft. The Series S and Series X play the same games! They are current gen devices. This PS portable you're describing is a last gen device. It will not natively play current gen games. It will play last gen games and *maybe* allow you to stream PS5 games. I'm sure some people would love this idea, but most would not. Sony made a device in the Vita that was supposed to appeal to a lot of people. It didn't. This device you're speaking of is extremely niche and is guaranteed to sell less than the Vita.

I don't see any way that the PS5 matches the PS4 numbers in Japan. But the gen is still early. We will revisit this often as this gen progresses.

$349 to $399?! LOL. Yeah, that would be DOA.

But it won't have the Vita's strengths! The Vita's strength was that it received NEW, EXCLUSIVE content. This hypothetical device you speak up might receive new content for the next year or two, but once cross gen games dry up that's bye bye new content. And it will not receive a single exclusive title. Don't exclusives matter? Not receiving new, exclusive content is a MASSIVE weakness. Maybe this new device does Steam Deck numbers, but that would be a colossal failure for Sony.

It sounds like Sony would have pricing issues too if you're suggesting they charge $400 for this device! And Sony had the brand power when they released the Vita and we know how that turned out. And Nintendo had the brand power and even more market experience than Sony when they released the Wii U and we know how that turned out too! You can't just throw shit at a wall and expect success based on your prior successes or your market experience. That's now how it works. Even the PS3 was a huge falling off from where the PS2 was. And Sony had a wealth of experience and brand power. What happened?! (rhetorical question, no need to answer)

But they are losing the money they could have made had their supply been better. So yeah, they've lost money in that sense. And yeah, I'm sure a lot of people that picked up a Series console will also buy a PS5 at a future date. But not everyone will. That's my point.

That still doesn't make sense for Sony to do. You've talked about how Sony has been able to maximize profits. That's their end goal. So why would they lower the price on their digital console, which would lower revenues, to "put pressure on the Series S pricing?" Why does Sony need to put pressure on Microsoft. LOL. They've always set their own terms. When the Xbox One dropped its price not long after launch did Sony follow suit? No. They have no need to. Sony isn't worried about putting pressure on Microsoft. That's nuts!

Yeah, I'll agree with this. This is a better solution than a Sony portable. Now whether that allows them to manufacture more units or not, I'm not sure. But right now with their current consoles Sony will be facing supply issues for at least the rest of the year. And we know the Series S consoles are lining shelves EVERYWHERE. Sony can't be happy about that.

I did some further thinking on them possibly revamping PS5 Digital to where they probably would not lose any money on it at $399, depending on if they can get increases in production volume by 2023:

[PS5 Digital Ver.2]

>Same CPU & GPU
>Same RAM capacity & bandwidth
>Same SSD I/O subsystem (5.5 GB/s raw bandwidth, up to 22 GB/s compressed)
>Significantly smaller internal SSD capacity (32 GB, for OS partition & files)
>Included M.2 replaceable SSD but much smaller capacity; 64 GB in size
>Included microSD for cold storage with bandwidth of 60 MB/s raw; interfaces
with SSD I/O and can provide compressed bandwidth of upwards 240 MB/s. UHS-II
Bus compliant, 1 TB capacity
>No disc drive
>$349 - $399 MSRP
>Possible 2023 full launch

That $349 wouldn't be at launch, but maybe with a price cut in 2025, assuming demand for the console remains strong enough (which seems like it certainly will). The idea is to have the M.2 storage large enough capacity-wise to hold a single typical AAA with lossless-compressed assets, while the microSD is for cold storage.

Only potential downside is the time it'd take to move game assets to and from microSD to the SSD; ~ 4 minutes and 30 seconds at 4:1 compression ratio, but real-world wise could be slower. Then again, games don't need to wait until all the data is on the SSD to actually start playing, so it should be fast enough for that.

I don't even know if the PS5 has a microSD slot but if not, they'd need to add one to a revamped PS5 Digital. Or they could forego microSD and go with USB, but it'd need to be with a port embedded deep into the system's casing so that a typical USB drive is flush with the PS5 once inserted, and not dangling off the side. Might be too troublesome though in terms of physical space and removal procedures, so probably better to go with microSD.
 
Top Bottom