• 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.

should sony have released a cheaper PS5?

DarkMage619

Member
You seem to be unaware that there are millions upon millions of PCs with no dedicated GPU at all, and guess what, those don't matter either because 99% of games with a noteworthy budget are developed for consoles first and foremost.
The xss will require extra budget from every developer this gen because unlike PC xy, and that's the part you seem to have a very ...very....hard time understanding, games are required to run on it, and contrary to popular belief games aren't just scalable with a slider....
Yup and those 'millions of PCs' you are talking about don't run games at all. Again office PCs aren't counted. Why would it take extra budget to make an XSS game specifically when the XDK creates 3 versions of games in the first place? MS has taken into account development on their SKUs hence the reason they changed their dev kit.

Games ARE scalable on the GPU and that is the primary difference between the varying platforms. You can't point to any title that had core gameplay compromised because of the weaker GPU on the XSS. The new Battlefield has the same 128 player matches on the XSS. That isn't true of last gen machines. The most important thing is the CPU seeing how AI and physics are tied to it. News flash the XSS has the same CPU.

Hate to break it to you but when I played fist party titles, I used to play the best version of the game before this shitfest started.
If you are talking about first party titles Sony has always had good single player, third person games and MS has produced the highest rated first party titles this year. It doesn't change the fact PC is still the place with the best graphics when you are rocking the best GPU, not console.
 

Haggard

Member
Yup and those 'millions of PCs' you are talking about don't run games at all. Again office PCs aren't counted
and again: it doesn`t matter.
No PCs matter for the game design.
big budget games aren`t designed for PC hardware ranges but for the standardized fixed console hardware. That is the target and the design-limiting factor in all directions. Your whole argumentation with PC hardware is rubbish because that side is simply irrelevant.
Yup and those 'millions of PCs' you are talking about don't run games at all. Again office PCs aren't counted. Why would it take extra budget to make an XSS game specifically when the XDK creates 3 versions of games in the first place? MS has taken into account development on their SKUs hence the reason they changed their dev kit.
Oh god, the naivety.....you sure as hell have zero software background if you think that it`s that easy, especially if you actually want to make full use of the top end platform and not run into massive optimization troubles.

Games ARE scalable on the GPU and that is the primary difference between the varying platforms.
Ppl like you seem to think that everything can just be done with some target sliders, and for simpler projects that´s actually not wrong. The issues start the moment you start to reach the capacity limits of the higher end hardware and have to try to translate optimization to lower tier hardware. That´s the point where feature cuts and reimplementations start. That´s the same for all kinds of software.
And we already see how tight the performance budget is on the "real" next gen systems. So how low exactly is the XSS allowed to drop during the gen before the "somewhat parity"-rule is thrown overboard?
 
Last edited:
*Was quoting orbital2060. Not sure why the quote button didn't work

It's not just the GPU that is different though is it. CPU speeds are worse, GPU speeds are worse and RAM is smaller and much slower. It's not a case of well series X can do 4k so by default Series S will manage exact same settings at 1080p as clearly seen by the varying performance, sometimes cutback detail levels and targeted resolutions from multiple developers.

In turn increasing development time and/or development cost. Fanboys saying it doesn't are deluded. How can making 2 versions of a game not impact it any way? You don't just push a button and there you go series s version is complete the game has to be optimised for both systems.
 
Last edited:

NinjaBoiX

Member
There are cheaper PS5 consoles, they are called PS4 and PS4 Pros.
This is actually bang on the money.

Let’s be honest, there aren’t that many compelling reasons to get a PS5 at the moment. You honestly might as well stay with a PS4 until the library grows a little.

(The argument for a Series S as a gamepass machine is a lot more legitimate IMO.)
 

yurinka

Member
i know we got the PS5 Digital but the only difference is there isn't a disc drive. i'm thinking of something like what the Series S is to the Series X. in addition to no disc drive: smaller ssd, less processing power acrossing CPU/GPU, lower resolution/fps.

we're well over a year into this generation and getting hold of a PS5 is still difficult. same goes for the Series X but the Series S is easy to get hold of. I know there will people coming in with "but xbox has no games hur duur" but if you put that aside the fact is that Microsoft has a next gen console that is easily available to access Gamepass and games like Forza Horizon 5, Flight Simulator, and Halo Infinite.

i'm holding off for a Series X but as time goes on i'm more and more tempted to just grab the Series S. if I were a PS fan and were struggling to get a PS5 then right now I'd love if there was a £250 playstation console.
No, it would be a dumb idea: there's already the PS4 and PS4 Pro for a cheaper, less powerful SKU. So devs who want to make this can just make the game crossgen, as it's the case of Forza Horizon 5, Halo Infinite, Horizon Forbidden West God of War Ragnarok or GT7.

PS5 is breaking sales records, and if doesn't sell more is due to the global lack of chips.
 

Yamisan

Member
That would make no sense, they have no issues selling it at its current price. The series S is a gimped complete waste of money.
 

Topher

Gold Member
Nope. Sony got it right, imo. In fact, I think Microsoft would have done well to release a digital edition XSX since their focus is Game Pass. I would have bought XSX DE in a heartbeat. I doubt the drive in my XSX will ever get used.
 

ethomaz

Banned
They released.

$399 with same specs from the most expensive option.

BTW they are all sold out no matter how much Sony shipped to Black Friday.
 
Last edited:
I'm confused, you think we're 3-4 years away from PS4/XB1 being dropped as a target platform?

They'll be dead before the end of 2022.

Most games in dev now will not launch on the last-gen consoles when they finally launch.
I think the shortage of next gen consoles have changed those plans.

It’s very possible that a good amount of big 3rd party games will continue to be cross gen because too much money will be left on the table for that to not happen.

People still can’t walk into a store and buy a PS5/Xbox Series so why would companies not continue cross gen? I think we will see more next gen only first party games though but I question if this will be the case for 3rd party games.
 
Last edited:
I say no too. The reason is that it's really not needed. The digital has the exact same performance and is $100 cheaper. The reduction in power wouldn't make enough difference price wise.
 
I say no too. The reason is that it's really not needed. The digital has the exact same performance and is $100 cheaper. The reduction in power wouldn't make enough difference price wise.

Plus it would lead to less premium PS5s being available and I don't think many want that to happen.
 

MastaKiiLA

Member
They're producing more units than both Series consoles combined, and can't meet demand. This is a production-limited situation, and splitting the SKUs is NOT the way to fix it, unless one SKU is extremely easy to produce. Given that the silicon is the limiting factor here, that would mean the new SKU would have a different, smaller SoC in it. So you're trading longevity for short-term manufacturing gains. What kind of gains though? You're not going to be doubling your production without some major compromises on the silicon side. So it makes more sense to keep the same internal construction, and just hope that the supply chain issue sorts itself out. All GPU-related manufacturers are affected here, and Sony is actually managing much better than most. TSMC has given them a solid portion of the production output, so I don't really think there's much else they could do. They already have the PS4 Pro for an underpowered, cheap model.
 
I think the shortage of next gen consoles have changed those plans.

It’s very possible that a good amount of big 3rd party games will continue to be cross gen because too much money will be left on the table for that to not happen.

People still can’t walk into a store and buy a PS5/Xbox Series so why would companies not continue cross gen? I think we will see more next gen only first party games though but I question if this will be the case for 3rd party games.

If you look at the sales of PS5 at least (no idea about XBX/S because MS isn't brave enough to share the numbers), at this point in the gen, they aren't that far behind the PS4 gen at the same period after launch. By the end of 2022, the cross-gen period would be 2+ years, as originally stated, and if you're following game sales numbers globally, in most western regions, PS5 versions of games are quickly and increasingly outselling the PS4 versions.

Publishers have access to all this data and more. So there's virtually no future where PS4/XB1 get supported for another 3-4 years -- the added dev burden of targetting 8-9 platforms alone is a reason enough to dump them. Even if the console hardware supply continues to see difficulty beyond 2022, once the majority of new game sales are on PS5/XSXS consoles (and we're already almost there), the legacy boxes will get dumped.
 

Psychostar

Member
We definitely don't want a cheaper , weaker ps5. I'm kind of regretting owning the launch model because it is so clear that they will inevitably release a pro version. The ps5 can't run games at 4k 60fps without cutting corners, so why would we want anything less? That's what the PS4 pro is for. The PS4 pro will fill in the gap for players who want to play games like god of war Ragnarok fairly.
 
Last edited:

Hezekiah

Member
I riddle you this then, did you buy the ps4 pro or xbox one x? Because in a way it's not any different than a half upgrade......
No I didn't buy a PS4 Pro.

And it was six years between the launches of the PS4 and the PS5, and the difference in GPU power, CPU power, and RAM is massive.

Playing games at 1080p (or less), at 30fps on a Series S wouldn't feel like a proper next-gen upgrade and it seems plenty agree with me.
 

Derktron

Banned
No, they need to stop playing these games and make more, if Apple and Samsung have no issues with supplies then Sony can make more. Pay more to make so that millions of people who don't have one can get one. I already gave up on it. At this point. I don't care for the PS5 anymore.
 

dvdvideo

Member
No I didn't buy a PS4 Pro.

And it was six years between the launches of the PS4 and the PS5, and the difference in GPU power, CPU power, and RAM is massive.

Playing games at 1080p (or less), at 30fps on a Series S wouldn't feel like a proper next-gen upgrade and it seems plenty agree with me.

This is where I think you and other people diverge. There are plenty of casual gamers that would consider a ps4 to something like a series s a pretty big upgrade. The cpu is about double the output, the gpu about triple, and ssd light years ahead of ps4. As far as resolution is concerned, tons of these people are sitting in front of 50 or 55" tv's from 12+ feet away and can't even see 4k........unless they have better than 20/20 vision.
 

Hezekiah

Member
This is where I think you and other people diverge. There are plenty of casual gamers that would consider a ps4 to something like a series s a pretty big upgrade. The cpu is about double the output, the gpu about triple, and ssd light years ahead of ps4. As far as resolution is concerned, tons of these people are sitting in front of 50 or 55" tv's from 12+ feet away and can't even see 4k........unless they have better than 20/20 vision.
Even if they think that now, in three years time I imagine they'll see things differently.
 
Last edited:
If you look at the sales of PS5 at least (no idea about XBX/S because MS isn't brave enough to share the numbers), at this point in the gen, they aren't that far behind the PS4 gen at the same period after launch. By the end of 2022, the cross-gen period would be 2+ years, as originally stated, and if you're following game sales numbers globally, in most western regions, PS5 versions of games are quickly and increasingly outselling the PS4 versions.

Publishers have access to all this data and more. So there's virtually no future where PS4/XB1 get supported for another 3-4 years -- the added dev burden of targetting 8-9 platforms alone is a reason enough to dump them. Even if the console hardware supply continues to see difficulty beyond 2022, once the majority of new game sales are on PS5/XSXS consoles (and we're already almost there), the legacy boxes will get dumped.
It would be great if cross gen games where dumped by the end of 2022 and the PS5 and Xbox Series X were supported exclusively going forward but I am saying I would not be surprised if that didn’t happened.

I hate to see that God of war ragnok and Horizon FB were not built exclusively for the PS5 but let’s get real….

Publishers have become increasingly greedy. We have seen this greed with Cyberpunk 2077 and GTA definitive edition. Even with the increase in PS5 game sales, the PS5 isn’t touching the PS4’s install base anytime soon, especially if the shortage continues which it seems like it will for another year.

I doubt games like Call of duty, assassin's creed and NBA 2K will be available exclusively for PS5/Xbox Series X by 2023 but I hope I am wrong.
 

dvdvideo

Member
Even if they think that now, in three years time I imagine they'll see things differently.

Doubtfull, the jump in graphics isn't really the primary reason they bought it to begin with, it was access to newer games. The enhanced graphics and ssd are a bonus that would continue.

And none of this is even covering situations like small kids who really don't care, secondary tv's/rooms, etc.
 
Last edited:

ReBurn

Gold Member
That would only have made supply of the real console even worse, since they'd be splitting the APU production between the two (the current two PS5 models have the same APU). So no.
A less expensive, lower spec PlayStation would still be a real console. it would just be different. And more affordable.
 

MikeM

Member
This is actually bang on the money.

Let’s be honest, there aren’t that many compelling reasons to get a PS5 at the moment. You honestly might as well stay with a PS4 until the library grows a little.

(The argument for a Series S as a gamepass machine is a lot more legitimate IMO.)
Depends on the person. I bought day one and think the PS5 is a massive difference compared to PS4.
 

Hezekiah

Member
Doubtfull, the jump in graphics isn't really the primary reason they bought it to begin with, it was access to newer games. The enhanced graphics and ssd are a bonus that would continue.

And none of this is even covering situations like small kids who really don't care, secondary tv's/rooms, etc.
If they only want access to a newer games they won't have upgraded yet anyway, and what you said about the CPU, GPU, RAM jump won't be relevant now anyway.

Regardless in Europe it's much easier to get than any of the other new consoles. Go online or to talk to people and a lot of gamers just aren't interested in getting it. It's a less attractive option for at least one reason, probably several.
 

dvdvideo

Member
If they only want access to a newer games they won't have upgraded yet anyway, and what you said about the CPU, GPU, RAM jump won't be relevant now anyway.

Regardless in Europe it's much easier to get than any of the other new consoles. Go online or to talk to people and a lot of gamers just aren't interested in getting it. It's a less attractive option for at least one reason, probably several.

People still want newer stuff, even if it's not top of the line. Like a midrange phone vs a flagship, and yet those still sell. And they are also easier to get. Talk to some people and they won't be interested in midrange, only the flagship.
 

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
clown GIF
 

Hezekiah

Member
People still want newer stuff, even if it's not top of the line. Like a midrange phone vs a flagship, and yet those still sell. And they are also easier to get. Talk to some people and they won't be interested in midrange, only the flagship.
Yeah some people. But relative to the proper next-gen consoles it's much less in demand. It's been that way since the beginning of the year.
 

Neo_game

Member
Absolutely no. May be if they want to extend PS5 life cycle they will have to come up with a Pro model. I would like to see consoles getting more premium. It is a good investment for at least 5yrs so why not go more premium say 700$ instead. So I hope I really hope 400 or 500$ is the cheaper one. For casuals Ipad or streaming games will suffice.
 

DarkMage619

Member
and again: it doesn`t matter.
No PCs matter for the game design.
big budget games aren`t designed for PC hardware ranges but for the standardized fixed console hardware. That is the target and the design-limiting factor in all directions. Your whole argumentation with PC hardware is rubbish because that side is simply irrelevant.

Oh god, the naivety.....you sure as hell have zero software background if you think that it`s that easy, especially if you actually want to make full use of the top end platform and not run into massive optimization troubles.


Ppl like you seem to think that everything can just be done with some target sliders, and for simpler projects that´s actually not wrong. The issues start the moment you start to reach the capacity limits of the higher end hardware and have to try to translate optimization to lower tier hardware. That´s the point where feature cuts and reimplementations start. That´s the same for all kinds of software.
And we already see how tight the performance budget is on the "real" next gen systems. So how low exactly is the XSS allowed to drop during the gen before the "somewhat parity"-rule is thrown overboard?
First I'm hearing that PC is not a consideration when developing games now. I suppose all those PC versions of games just happen by accident. Just because two of the platform holders either ignore the PC or develop games for it years later doesn't change the reality that the PC absolutely is a target for the vast majority of games today. Name a major 3rd party game that isn't on PC.

You are the only one talking about sliders and about easy game creation. Game development is hard but that isn't because of the XSS. It is because the multitude of different devices games have to run on, PC being a big part. Because the XSS get its own version of games created for it by the XDK it alleviates some of the challenges with the Xbox side of development. The scalable GPU allows graphics details to be adjusted. Again the CPU is the main component that accounts for AI and physics and that the XSS has the same CPU as all of the current generation consoles and has the same feature set. You can't point to missing core gameplay features for any XSS title in fact the XSS version of games tends to have modes that are missing from games running on last generation hardware. Not bad for a console that isn't 'next gen'.

The full feature set of all of these systems hasn't been reached so its ridiculous to talk about performance budget limits a bit after a year of being out. All systems will continue to have performance improvements just like every other console ever. The XSS will have a full life cycle just all the other consoles have no matter how much unaffected, non Xbox customers complain and that's a good thing.

This has veered off the topic of whether or not Sony should make a lower end console. I don't think they have the bandwidth to follow in MS' direction. They are better off keeping it simple and focusing on the traditional console model established in the Atari and NES days. If the MS philosophy takes off you'll see others following. If not again no one is really negatively affected. It is alright for each platform holder to do things differently.
 

dvdvideo

Member
Yeah some people. But relative to the proper next-gen consoles it's much less in demand. It's been that way since the beginning of the year.

I think the market is all messed up. There is probably a large group of early adopters that are snapping up ps5's and series x. Shortages of pc video cards are putting more pressure on this area than ever before.

What I'm saying though, is that in a normal electronic market, even the video game one, there's plenty of reason and traction for a mid range skew. They basically proved that last gen but in reverse by having ps4 and ps4 pro.
The ps4 became the mid range, the ps4 pro the high end. If a ps5 light existed this gen, it would simply be ps5 light and ps5.

I for one think it would have been cool to have a $249 5tf sony machine in a compact form factor with ssd and current architecture.
 
Last edited:

Fare thee well

Neophyte
The price doesn't bother me. Just the availability. But I just hope all we have to worry about in the future is still just video games 😑
 

MaKTaiL

Member
No, and I actually believe their approach for the disc-less version was wrong. They should have offered it at the same price as the disc version but with twice the storage size. I would have considered buying it instead of disc one if that was the case.
 

Exoil

Member
Hmmm never thought about this but there are people crying out for a pro version later in the generation which will introduce another console spec. I don't think I've seen anyone complaints over that prospect.

Yet when the XSS is brought into a discussion....
And what about when we get the PS5 Pro and Series XX? How will the Series S fare then? I don't even want to think about it to be honest.
 

assurdum

Member
i know we got the PS5 Digital but the only difference is there isn't a disc drive. i'm thinking of something like what the Series S is to the Series X. in addition to no disc drive: smaller ssd, less processing power acrossing CPU/GPU, lower resolution/fps.

we're well over a year into this generation and getting hold of a PS5 is still difficult. same goes for the Series X but the Series S is easy to get hold of. I know there will people coming in with "but xbox has no games hur duur" but if you put that aside the fact is that Microsoft has a next gen console that is easily available to access Gamepass and games like Forza Horizon 5, Flight Simulator, and Halo Infinite.

i'm holding off for a Series X but as time goes on i'm more and more tempted to just grab the Series S. if I were a PS fan and were struggling to get a PS5 then right now I'd love if there was a £250 playstation console.
One day I will understand why someone are so tempted to have a noticeable weaker sku just to save 100 bucks...
 
Last edited:

Hezekiah

Member
I think the market is all messed up. There is probably a large group of early adopters that are snapping up ps5's and series x. Shortages of pc video cards are putting more pressure on this area than ever before.

What I'm saying though, is that in a normal electronic market, even the video game one, there's plenty of reason and traction for a mid range skew. They basically proved that last gen but in reverse by having ps4 and ps4 pro.
The ps4 became the mid range, the ps4 pro the high end. If a ps5 light existed this gen, it would simply be ps5 light and ps5.

I for one think it would have been cool to have a $249 5tf sony machine in a compact form factor with ssd and current architecture.
There are unfortunate limitations of certain parts but very few hardcore PC-only gamers are suddenly going to become console owners. People are going to buy what they are going to buy.

And what we are seeing is Series S consoles constantly in stock at retailers, while the PS5 and Series X disappear immediately because most people don't want a nerfed next-gen console. It shows a huge difference in how much the Series S is wanted, and I'm sure a low-end PS5 would be more popular as it's a bigger brand, but far less wanted than the main PS5 also.
 

dvdvideo

Member
There are unfortunate limitations of certain parts but very few hardcore PC-only gamers are suddenly going to become console owners. People are going to buy what they are going to buy.

And what we are seeing is Series S consoles constantly in stock at retailers, while the PS5 and Series X disappear immediately because most people don't want a nerfed next-gen console. It shows a huge difference in how much the Series S is wanted, and I'm sure a low-end PS5 would be more popular as it's a bigger brand, but far less wanted than the main PS5 also.

I don't think that's true at all, not everyone has unlimited budget. They look at a mid level pc market now at $1000+ and decide a $500 console makes sense, this wasn't the case before.

If people didn't want a "nerfed" console, it flat out wouldn't sell. If you look at the reviews, the buyers of these consoles are 98% happy.
Nerfed is just a stupid way to describe it, do you call a Samsung s20 a "nerfed" phone vs a s20 ultra? Or a computer with a 2060 a "nerfed" computer vs a 3070?
Your just getting silly at this point.

It doesn't really matter if it would be less popular than the main skew, the idea would be to get more consoles overall in place.
 
Top Bottom