-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Retail Perspective on Iterative Hardware (PS4K, Xbox1.5 etc)
- Thread starter Abdiel
- Start date
What do you know about NX? Spill the beans lol
Naked Prime
Member
In recent weeks my customer base has had little to no interest in the PS4K tbh. A large part of that is, I believe, is due to the fact that its being talked about by everyone but Sony. Its a sku that supports 4K video but beyond that offers little else to the casual/average user. Personally, I think Sony was just gonna put unit out and slap a "4K compatible" sticker on it and eventually phase out the original ps4 model(s) and leave this the last box standing; also bundle this sku with PSVR. Frankly I can't see why Sony just didn't beef up the APU in the box that is included with the PSVR (providing there is an APU) and just have 4K as a bonus feature when you purchase the hmd. Even a $50 higher msrp would have be vindicated given the added feature.
There has been even less conversation about an updated Xbox One.
The tone is set, in store, largely the staff so I suspect all stores' interest/hype levels to vary.
There has been even less conversation about an updated Xbox One.
The tone is set, in store, largely the staff so I suspect all stores' interest/hype levels to vary.
NinjaCoachZ
Member
Man, I'm going to feel bad for Nintendo if they announce a new console at E3, and then Sony pretty much declares that iterative consoles are the way of the future and thus they'll never need another console again.
Unless NX is ALSO iterative.
Unless NX is ALSO iterative.
(Which doesn't seem too farfetched considering Iwata's likening it to the Apple model...)
TheLaughingStock
Member
Did people already forget what happened with the Xbox launch and PS3? What people say on the internet does matter to a significant degree.
I'm in retail myself, hence the point of the OP, heh.
But, the idea isn't to sell anyone on the idea of anything, more to address a lot of broad brush commentary and speculations/exaggerations I saw in various threads throughout the day. These are purely from the sales/retail perspective, obviously, and I don't attempt to claim to know how the develoment cycle stuff will go, though devs have spoken up in various threads as well with their own answers to that stuff.
I am sure that we'll see trade-up programs to encourage adoption, but regardless, I don't think it will just bomb, nor do I expect this to be marketed with the intent of mass market adoption anyway, that will always be the purpose of the main line SKU in the first place.
Oy, considering that there's no profit margins on game hardware, selling a more expensive console just to sell a bigger number means nothing, and it's usually a harder sell. It's typically easier to sell the cheaper console and get more stuff added onto the sale that actually has profit margins, like games, warranty, etc. So I'd disagree with you there. The more expensive it is, the harder the sell is for the store to actually make money on it for something like this.
The point of the OP was to address commentary being made in lots of threads today, by people with no exposure to these kinds of market realities, to help put things into a clearer perpsective. I wanted to try and offer some insight to folks who had never worked retail or been around the larger purchasing 'audience' beyond their own buying habits, and were making comments as to the likliehood of success or failure purely based on that.
Seems to have been pretty successful so far on what I aimed for, though I am hoping for more discussion and less people putting feelings into posts (Not you, no worries)
Apparently it only matters when they don't like the idea
wapplew
Member
This is the biggest challenge for them.
I'm sure PS4K/Xbox1.5 will be run away success but how will that affect the next iteration is much more important.
apieceofstrange
Member
When it comes to upgrading consoles, 3-4 years is probably the sweet spot for me. 5 years is starting to push it, and 6-7 years is entirely too long.
If it came down to consoles refreshing yearly or every other year, I'd probably stop buying them day 1 and wait for games that both interested me and took advantage of the hardware.
If it came down to consoles refreshing yearly or every other year, I'd probably stop buying them day 1 and wait for games that both interested me and took advantage of the hardware.
I don't understand this - they are. It's mandated by Sony that games on Neo have to meet or exceed the OG version. It's also clear that games will benefit visually as well as performance wise - it was stated. You are just willingly ignoring this. This is what better hardware is allowing. It will also benefit the VR games space. That's pretty much a given.
Haha. That sounds like a good plan, but I really look forward to reading your thoughts. I'll be on my phone at work tomorrow, so my replies during the day may be less extensive, but I'll do my best until after my shift.
Nothing, nothing, I didn't mean me personally, I meant until more is out on the field to speculate more on what all of the companies are doing. Sorry if that wasn't clear, haha. Though I'm curious as to how it's going to go for them when they do reveal it later anyway.
Oh, no, definitely. 99% of my customers have no idea this is even in the works. I just have some regulars who are more savvy and talk with me about the latest news stuff when they come in, they're the electronics equivalents of rumor-ramblers. They just want to discuss stuff with people who actually pay attention.
They're interested, curious but not sold on anything. And that's totally reasonable. So I just assume that once there's official announcements we'll get more regular inquiries and so on, and once formal preorders open we'll see metrics start popping up.
PS3 launch has nothing in common with this, it's not a year after its competition and it's not priced out of mass market. Even if it is 600$ which i kinda hope it is the regular PS4 will most likely be 300$ or less by then and will continue to sell like crazy. No regular gamer that I've told about this has expressed any amount of anger over it. They say "oh cool" then they go about their lives.
wapplew
Member
I'm aware of Neo will give us better performance or graphics but I'm not talking about enhance version of the same game. I'm talking about exclusive titles build from ground up with that hardware capability in mind.
Yes, I know games on 980ti look or run better compare to 970, but they are essentially playing same games.
What I want is PS5 exclusive game, not PS4/PS4.5 games enhance version, that's not what I want for my latest hardware.
If they go the iOS/PC route, everyone will stop making exclusive for the most powerful hardware at the time, they are going to make games for largest install base at the time and enhance it for most powerful hardware.
I know most publisher already did that it's call cross gen, but this time first party will have to do the same. There will be zero exclusive games.
It doesn't have to be in line with the PS3 launch for someone to view it as bad.
And I've seen a lot of people on forums expressing their dislike for this idea. What's your point?
Scrotum Phillips
Member
I can't get enough of these PS4K threads. Each one presents some worst case hypothetical scenario that's amusing. In this thread, for some reason NeoGaf is extremely concerned about parents buying video game consoles for their kids when there will be a grand total of two different versions likely priced over $100 apart. I mean, if they buy the wrong console can't they just return it? Blammo, fixed.
That is a concern of mine as well but I assume a mid gen refresh means we will still have a completely new system after 6 or so years and thus the cycle continues. Or in 2020 when the PS4K.2 comes out its a bigger leap and the regular PS4 goes away. Only time will tell.
Happens a lot of the time in the shops we have here (UK). Game and PC World always try and get you to buy the more expensive thing. Had it happen to me a few times.
AnimatorBaron
Neo Member
Absolutely. I haven't spent a ton of time in the other threads, so Im not super familiar with some of the speculation. But business-wise, "premium" versions of tech, when implemented and marketed correctly, make sense.
This happened today over Google hangouts with my best friend Patrick who's a life long game fan and PlayStation fan. He got a PlayStation 4 last summer. This is all true.
I sent him the link to the Digital Foundry article.
Pat: It is the One!
Me: haha, yeah people are going nuts over it.
Pat: Why? Good or bad?
Me: A little bit of both. You read the article right?
Pat: yeah so all it does is up specs and framerates and such?
Me: yeah. Like maybe Ratchet and Clank could run at 60 fps instead of 30 fps.
Pat: Ratchet and Clank runs at 30 fps? That games really pretty. I've beaten it twice.
Me: Yeah, I'm playing it now too. But you didn't notice?
Pat: Not really, I just loved the game. Are you gonna buy the new PS4K?
Me: Yes, I bought a PS4 at launch and feel like I need an upgrade. I've had some disc drive issues as well as WiFi weirdness.
Pat: I knew you're going to buy the new one. Ha. My PS4 is doing just fine so I'll wait.
Me: You're not pissed off about this? You bought your console a year ago.
Pat: Not really. I can play all the same games. I'll let you tell me if it's worth it and then I'll wait for a sale or something. I'm happy now.
Me: Wait a second, you, a lifelong PS fan aren't mad about this? I'm just wondering...
Pat: No. Not really. I don't care. I don't have the money right now. If it makes a huge difference I'll buy one later.
I just found this very interesting as it's kind of a microcosm of what some people are saying about the console. My friend and I have been playing games for forever together. I honestly understand why some people are frustrated if they bought a console a month ago or last week. It sucks. But this type of stuff happens all the time. You kind of have to hold your ear to the ground in the tech world to know what's happening. But most people don't really care.
Sony just can't hinder the PS4 performance in comparison to the PS4K. They have to have a mandate about that. It should be scaled like a PC system. Bad word of mouth goes a long way. Just ask Microsoft. It's definitely a weird move, but I think it's a new trend. It serves my interests to get a new, better console but I can understand how people feel. But at the end of the day, we'll all be playing the same games. If performance dictates your opinion of a game, then go for the PS4K.
Just my two cents.
I sent him the link to the Digital Foundry article.
Pat: It is the One!
Me: haha, yeah people are going nuts over it.
Pat: Why? Good or bad?
Me: A little bit of both. You read the article right?
Pat: yeah so all it does is up specs and framerates and such?
Me: yeah. Like maybe Ratchet and Clank could run at 60 fps instead of 30 fps.
Pat: Ratchet and Clank runs at 30 fps? That games really pretty. I've beaten it twice.
Me: Yeah, I'm playing it now too. But you didn't notice?
Pat: Not really, I just loved the game. Are you gonna buy the new PS4K?
Me: Yes, I bought a PS4 at launch and feel like I need an upgrade. I've had some disc drive issues as well as WiFi weirdness.
Pat: I knew you're going to buy the new one. Ha. My PS4 is doing just fine so I'll wait.
Me: You're not pissed off about this? You bought your console a year ago.
Pat: Not really. I can play all the same games. I'll let you tell me if it's worth it and then I'll wait for a sale or something. I'm happy now.
Me: Wait a second, you, a lifelong PS fan aren't mad about this? I'm just wondering...
Pat: No. Not really. I don't care. I don't have the money right now. If it makes a huge difference I'll buy one later.
I just found this very interesting as it's kind of a microcosm of what some people are saying about the console. My friend and I have been playing games for forever together. I honestly understand why some people are frustrated if they bought a console a month ago or last week. It sucks. But this type of stuff happens all the time. You kind of have to hold your ear to the ground in the tech world to know what's happening. But most people don't really care.
Sony just can't hinder the PS4 performance in comparison to the PS4K. They have to have a mandate about that. It should be scaled like a PC system. Bad word of mouth goes a long way. Just ask Microsoft. It's definitely a weird move, but I think it's a new trend. It serves my interests to get a new, better console but I can understand how people feel. But at the end of the day, we'll all be playing the same games. If performance dictates your opinion of a game, then go for the PS4K.
Just my two cents.
. AstroNut325
Member
I bought my PS4 in November 2015 (less than six months ago) and I fully welcome the PS4K.
For the people who want it... great you can buy an upgraded machine. For the people that don't want to spend the money now, great... you can hang on to your console until you're ready to move up.
Not having clean/hard resets every gen sounds good to me.
For the people who want it... great you can buy an upgraded machine. For the people that don't want to spend the money now, great... you can hang on to your console until you're ready to move up.
Not having clean/hard resets every gen sounds good to me.
Great points in the OP, i definitely think the market is there for this upgrade and it will do decently, along with a swift price drop on the base model and we could see overall adoption go up a bit quicker. The enthusiast market certainly exists, we've seen things like the Xbox One elite controller succeed in its own right.
The real draw here will be the (assumed) base model price drop, if they can get that to $250 or something they will fly off the shelves like gamecubes should have
The real draw here will be the (assumed) base model price drop, if they can get that to $250 or something they will fly off the shelves like gamecubes should have
You don't really get clean hard resets even when a new generation is introduced, as there are always still cross platform titles and a tie over period. That will still exist even with iterative console hardware releases, only they'll be even more complicated for developers, and likely drawn out longer too.
I personally like the faster upgrade cycle and having newer hardware available sooner. But I think a lot of peoples hang-ups are around software support. The only news/rumors we have are about hardware. We are left to guess how software will be pushed forward. In the past we as consumers knew exactly when a software generation started and ended. had a relatively good idea of the performance of games in general. Now we have no idea how this will be handled.
Guaranteed support by hardware manufacturer for a number of years?
Up to each developer to say when and how?
Guaranteed performance on older models?
Many have huge concerns about this, and until manufacturers come clean on their plans, I feel they have good reason to.
Guaranteed support by hardware manufacturer for a number of years?
Up to each developer to say when and how?
Guaranteed performance on older models?
Many have huge concerns about this, and until manufacturers come clean on their plans, I feel they have good reason to.
I can see things accelerating rather drastically the lower they get the price of the base model. This enhanced model just enables them to approach the market in new ways, and angles... but they have to do so carefully.
InsaneTiger
Member
Excellent post OP, a very refreshing point of view. I agree with everything you had to say. The base model isn't going away and the introduction will just spur more people to buy the base model because it's "cheaper."
Some other posts from people, it's like they can see the forest for the trees.
"It has always worked like this and it can't ever change." Le sigh
Some other posts from people, it's like they can see the forest for the trees.
"It has always worked like this and it can't ever change." Le sigh
Scrotum Phillips
Member
Once Sony clarifies things, I can see this being a great move.
1) This will cater to a healthy percentage of already existing PS4 customers who are willing to double dip.
2) The likely vastly cheaper OG PS4 appeals to that $250ish sweetspot audience.
3) Serves as a way to pimp out their 4K content and trojan horse themselves in a similar way the PS2 did with dvd's.
All those sound like wins to me and I'd fall under option 1 as i'd like a newer shinier PS4 after my launch one has served me so well.
With that said, I see little to no reason to buy a PS4 in the interim until we know specifics. Once those are known, you'll likely save some coin if you deem OG PS4 good enough for your needs at a reduced price or you'll know if you have to have the new PS4K hotness.
1) This will cater to a healthy percentage of already existing PS4 customers who are willing to double dip.
2) The likely vastly cheaper OG PS4 appeals to that $250ish sweetspot audience.
3) Serves as a way to pimp out their 4K content and trojan horse themselves in a similar way the PS2 did with dvd's.
All those sound like wins to me and I'd fall under option 1 as i'd like a newer shinier PS4 after my launch one has served me so well.
With that said, I see little to no reason to buy a PS4 in the interim until we know specifics. Once those are known, you'll likely save some coin if you deem OG PS4 good enough for your needs at a reduced price or you'll know if you have to have the new PS4K hotness.
GHG
Member
The current way of doing things is incredibly messy and archaic for all parties involved.
For developers/publishers:
- Having to learn how to deal with new hardware from scratch each time
- Having to have 2 completely separate teams for each version because the hardware is so different (eg. PS3/PS4) which is more expensive
- Having to take on the huge risk of funding and creating games for a new platform with a tiny initial userbase, not knowing if the new platform will succeed or fail.
For consumers:
- Having no backwards compatibility and not having your existing library carry over
- Not being able to still play with your friends who haven't moved on to the new console yet
- Having to rebuy games/peripherals/accessories for the new console
Moving towards iterative consoles simply removes fragmentation for all parties involved. There will come a time when the OG PS4 will officially be "no longer supported" but that will come at a time when most people have naturally moved on to one of the successive models anyway. I'm willing to bet that we will not see a PS5 in the traditional sense but the ps4k's successor will be another iterative step 2-3 years down the line.
wapplew
Member
Agree. Start from zero is over exaggerated.
I see iOS/PC model will do more harm than good in the long run.
First of, we can't compare the adoption rate with phones cause Apple sold over 50m phone each iteration, console can't match that. It take us 8 years to reach 160m.
Phones is essential electronic, from power to screen, battery, design, camera etc, it provide much more incentive for us to upgrade.
What iterative will console give us? 100% to 150% more powerful and maybe better controller.
What about games library, the most important deciding factor for console? Enhance version of the titles that you can play on your older iteration that's it.
Adoption rate will take huge hit for sure, giving devs even less reason to move forward.
I expect Sony to put that fear to rest when they official announce it. They would not be banking so hard on this being tied to the PS4 development to the point not having exclusive features for PS4K if they wanted to move to iterative models, nor would they be calling it the PS4K...
They know that the base standard is going to need a huge boost eventually, and PS5 will give that.
This is an "interim" console, to feed their base with a more powerful option.
GHG
Member
There will not be any such thing as "cross gen" anymore. That's not how it works.
That's what they plan on doing. Upgrading their consoles 3-4 years(ps4k, xbox 1.5)then after 3-4 more years release an even more powerful new system (ps5,xbox two). This way they extend what the system can do.
ninjablade
Banned
On the other hand you don't know what kind development tools sony is gonna use, for all we know it could as simple as switching a switch, and testing a few configurations.
StarBlazers1
Member
The biggest challenge I have in understanding the reasoning behind this move is the motivation.
Let's be real, this isn't going to expand the market that much. Many of the people who intend to purchase this will be hardcore console gamers. A large majority of them were day one buyers of the base PS4.
The rules Sony seems to have put in place to keep the base happy is fine for a year or two, but an eventual move to the Neo model has to occur fairly soon. Sony is going to want to counter the NX or whatever MS does.
On top of all this is the question of VR. Is this upgrade a response to the lack of quality of VR games as opposed to the higher powered VR competition.
As far as retail goes, I was a buyer many years ago for EBgames before the GameStop buyout. The rules haven't changed very much, but adding a close to zero margin item to the assortment, which may not create a more profitable ecosystem seems very meh. If the consumer had to rebuy many of the games they wanted to play on the new system or games in addition to the current selection, I could see that happen. Or even if the prices went up a few dollars and created a fewer extra points of margin, I could see more excitement for it. I'm playing devils advocate, but bottom line is everything in the retail world. This seems to go against it. A large influx of base machines being traded in means lower margins on selling used machines.
I don't know. I could be wrong, but from a buyer's perspective, if I didn't see an item being a huge volume driver, it didn't excite me.
Let's be real, this isn't going to expand the market that much. Many of the people who intend to purchase this will be hardcore console gamers. A large majority of them were day one buyers of the base PS4.
The rules Sony seems to have put in place to keep the base happy is fine for a year or two, but an eventual move to the Neo model has to occur fairly soon. Sony is going to want to counter the NX or whatever MS does.
On top of all this is the question of VR. Is this upgrade a response to the lack of quality of VR games as opposed to the higher powered VR competition.
As far as retail goes, I was a buyer many years ago for EBgames before the GameStop buyout. The rules haven't changed very much, but adding a close to zero margin item to the assortment, which may not create a more profitable ecosystem seems very meh. If the consumer had to rebuy many of the games they wanted to play on the new system or games in addition to the current selection, I could see that happen. Or even if the prices went up a few dollars and created a fewer extra points of margin, I could see more excitement for it. I'm playing devils advocate, but bottom line is everything in the retail world. This seems to go against it. A large influx of base machines being traded in means lower margins on selling used machines.
I don't know. I could be wrong, but from a buyer's perspective, if I didn't see an item being a huge volume driver, it didn't excite me.
Yeah, because everybody protested the 3DS because they were bitter over the DSi and everybody is going to protest the NX because of the New 3DS.
When Sony announces the PS5 everyone will conveniently forget how mad they were over this.
Your assuming too much as console gamers do not forget, look at the Xbox One's sales compared to the PS4 for proof of that. Let alone your statement about the New 3DS and NX makes no sense as the NX is supposed to be a home console and not a handheld system.
wapplew
Member
Not when all the games you could play on PS5 is just enhance version of PS4.5 maybe enhance version of PS4 too.
This post and the points brought up are baffling to me.
Everything you described will still happen with the PS4K being introduced, and in-fact it'll be even worse, as there is more fragmentation and even more consoles for developers to have to cater for, or transition away from with respect to cross platform releases towards the end of a cycle.
Secondly, there is no way that instead of a true next generation release, e.g. the PS5, we simply get continuous iterational releases that are still further held back by not only the PS4K, but also the PS4. The entire point of a generational leap is that you can truly expand on new technologies, features, graphics and tech, which being tied down to older hardware absolutely nullifies and prevents. Cross gen games (e.g. PS3/PS4, or 360/XO) generally suffer and pale in comparison to next gen only games, and what you're suggesting is essentially a perpetual cycle of cross gen releases, by virtue of continuous iterative hardware releases, that would not only stifle technological and graphical progress, but also hamper gameplay design through limiting potential in constantly being held back by older hardware.
I assume thats what will happen. Just that you cant use higher capacity bluray discs for software for backwards compatibility. Hence there being no need to provide it in game dev kits or documentation.
I hope software can catch up with the iterations. 3-4 years dev time is not feasible anymore but customers want more higher image fidelity and AAA dev cost is already expensive as it is now. To shorten dev time without compromising quality would mean content will be much lower and DLC content will be standard.
DannyDanger
Member
your TV example is in favor of ps4.5? New TVs come out every year... Not many ppl buy new TVs every yr, because their TVs still work just fine. It's gonna be the same with PS4.... It will still work! So the idea that it negatively affects the longevity of the OG PS4 makes no sense...
As far as ppl waiting for the more advanced version... The majority never do that with consumer electronics, why would they start now?
If a feature or innovation becomes popular enough, it can become standard, especially if introduced by the hardware manufacturer. Dual Shock for the PS1 was introduced mid-gen for instance. Wii motion plus was introduced mid-gen and become standard later. This can easily happen with closed platforms.
This is actually what I wanted to ask about. I'm not quite old enough to remember the era of pre-NES game consoles and home computers, but my understanding is that at least some of them were iterative. Like, the PC-98 wasn't one computer, but a series of them. I don't know if software was inter-compatible between models though. Was that the case for the Amiga or BBC Micro?
In many ways to me it looks like the gaming industry is returning to how things were pre-1983, with a wider variety of platforms that act more like computers than proprietary appliances, and most software being ported between all those platforms.
