Next-gen PS5 and next Xbox speculation |OT11| All Hell Has Broken Loose. CONTEST INSIDE!

What should we do?

  • Go to the Winchester

    Votes: 64 18.2%
  • Have a nice cold pint

    Votes: 79 22.5%
  • Wait for all of this to blow over

    Votes: 86 24.5%
  • Would anybody like a walnut?

    Votes: 18 5.1%
  • I bet mooses eat walnuts

    Votes: 39 11.1%
  • A can of pineapples

    Votes: 27 7.7%
  • HAIR

    Votes: 38 10.8%

  • Total voters
    351

VX1

Member
Oct 28, 2017
6,225
Europe
Someone commented earlier that those comments referred to BC but Jim's comments in the Gamesindustry article seem pretty clear:
It will be fascinating to watch how quickly sales slow down if PS5 launches at $499.Enthusiasts will buy it, of course, at that price but even if there are supply constraints we are talking about 6-9 months after launch.And then what? MS will have cheaper Lockhart after Series X sales slow down but what is Sony going to do? $499 PS5 will probably need price cut in late 2021 already to stay competitive.
 

Fabtacular

Member
Jul 11, 2019
204
Loss leader on the back of a very successful gen would be a very dumb move.
That's a reasonable take.

But another reasonable take would be to observe that PS3 and XB1 were both moderate disasters resulting from Sony/MS attempting to leverage the commercial success of the preceding console, and taking their eyes off the road in the process.
 

Seshumaru

Member
Oct 27, 2017
797
The Netherlands
So...the expensive cooling solution only means that the GitHub Leak is real?

There is not a chance that the cooling solution maybe is expensive because SONY is aiming to a smaller form factor console design ?
Sorry......Only my second part was serious........

Of course anything is possible. And i don't believe the GitHub leak is telling the whole story and neither is this article. We can assume what we want but without more information it's just trying to let your biases dictate your thought process.
 

klik

Member
Apr 4, 2018
634
Just a reminder that this past generation was an anomaly:
Console ---- BOM ---- MSRP ---- Differance ---- Difference adjusted to inflation
PS1 ---------- 430$ ----- 299$ ------- 131$ ----------------- $223
PS2 ---------- 479$ ----- 299$ ------- 180$ ----------------- $271
PS3 ---------- 805$ ----- 599$ ------- 206$ ----------------- $267
360 ---------- 525$ ----- 399$ ------- 126$ ----------------- $167

Will it be optimal for Sony to sell the PS5 at 399$? Probably not. Is there zero chance of them selling it for 399, a 51$ difference between MSRP and BOM, if they feel that they really have to? No, there is a chance. Actually, it will be their smallest BOM to MSRP difference after the PS4.
PS3 was 499$. 60gb model was 599$
 

Nostradamus

Member
Oct 28, 2017
1,037
Just a reminder that this past generation was an anomaly:
Console ---- BOM ---- MSRP ---- Differance ---- Difference adjusted to inflation
PS1 ---------- 430$ ----- 299$ ------- 131$ ----------------- $223
PS2 ---------- 479$ ----- 299$ ------- 180$ ----------------- $271
PS3 ---------- 805$ ----- 599$ ------- 206$ ----------------- $267
360 ---------- 525$ ----- 399$ ------- 126$ ----------------- $167

Will it be optimal for Sony to sell the PS5 at 399$? Probably not. Is there zero chance of them selling it for 399, a 51$ difference between MSRP and BOM, if they feel that they really have to? No, there is a chance. Actually, it will be their smallest BOM to MSRP difference after the PS4.
Yes but up until the second half of the PS360 era, none of the companies cared about profitability. Sony never cared about the profitability of PlayStation till after the PS3 launched. They only cared about bringing cutting edge technology to the general market (that's why Sony was so aggressive particularly with the PS2). Similarly, MS was trying to expand its install base. Everything is different now. Both companies want profits out of their gaming divisions. So I don't think that the old pattern applies any more.
 

DrKeo

Member
Mar 3, 2019
1,726
Israel
PS3 was 499$. 60gb model was 599$
All the BOMs are aligned with the relevant SKU.

Yes but up until the second half of the PS360 era, none of the companies cared about profitability. Sony never cared about the profitability of PlayStation till after the PS3 launched. They only cared about bringing cutting edge technology to the general market. Similarly, MS was trying to expand its install base. Everything is different now. Both companies want profits out of their gaming divisions. So I don't think that the old pattern applies any more.
What? A publicly-traded company didn't care about their profitability? Was the PS1-3 built as a community service for children? The only difference between previous gens and current-gen was that both companies thought the console market was doomed, they didn't count on 7 years of revenue and Nintendo had shown them with the Wii that day-one hardware (almost) profitability was acceptable.

No one is asking Sony to have a 200$+ difference between the BOM and MSRP like the PS1-3 did, but 51$ is pretty acceptable if they really need it. Obviously they would rather go with 499$ and break even on day-one, if they can.
 
Last edited:

SageShinigami

Member
Oct 27, 2017
17,700
It will be fascinating to watch how quickly sales slow down if PS5 launches at $499.Enthusiasts will buy it, of course, at that price but even if there are supply constraints we are talking about 6-9 months after launch.And then what? MS will have cheaper Lockhart after Series X sales slow down but what is Sony going to do? $499 PS5 will probably need price cut in late 2021 already to stay competitive.
I think $499 will do "okay", but $599? I almost wanna see it so six months in sales can slow to a crawl while this place wonders why they aren't selling. "But it's a powerful system...!" Yeah sure but that doesn't mean people are willing to drop that money on it.
 

Chamon

Member
Feb 26, 2019
315
I had a similar thought today as I read yet another article (this time in print, Wireframe magazine p26) stating Microsoft won't have any actual next-gen games. You'd think if the truth was actually the interpretation where Matt Booty meant 2 years max X1S support from the date of his statement, and a bevvy of real next gen games were to be expected in time for Christmas 2021, MS would have stepped in to correct this now quite widespread and surely damaging "xbox has no (next-gen) games" narrative. No?

It seems in general, these companies very rarely step in to conradict incorrect rumors and speculation.
Yeah, you are probably right, but I think it is not the same case. There is not a narrative of not next gen games at launch, only that Microsoft studios games are going to be cross gen. Third parties can still make only next gen games for xbox. Some people may consider this negative but other can see it as a sign of respecting the installed base on xbox one.

Very often I've seen marketing people talking about how companies want to control the narrative, that's what make me think that if the general opinion of PS5 is moving to it being less powerful than Xbox, they'd probably like to correct this in case of not being true. But maybe they don't feel the necessity, I don't know.
 

BitsandBytes

Member
Dec 16, 2017
3,659
It will be fascinating to watch how quickly sales slow down if PS5 launches at $499.Enthusiasts will buy it, of course, at that price but even if there are supply constraints we are talking about 6-9 months after launch.And then what? MS will have cheaper Lockhart after Series X sales slow down but what is Sony going to do? $499 PS5 will probably need price cut in late 2021 already to stay competitive.
I posted in the BOM thread earlier that PS4 UK sales ( and most products to be fair) slowed sharply after the initial sales. 250K launch weekend, 530K after 5 weeks and 1 million after 9 months. This at £349.
 

Kyolux

Community Resettler
Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,370
NCR, Canada
AegonSnake I'm having doubts about the face buttons. With the SSD being this expensive, I think they'll run out of money for face buttons. They might just pack in some old Atari controllers.
 

Nostradamus

Member
Oct 28, 2017
1,037
What? A publicly-traded company didn't care about their profitability? Was the PS1-3 a community service for children? The only difference was that in the current-gen both companies thought the console market is doomed so they didn't count on 7 years of revenue.
I only talked about their gaming division. Their profits during the PS1 and PS2 eras were laughable compared to their perceived success (there is no point mentioning the gigantic losses during the PS3 era). They cared more about selling the hardware way below cost to as many people as possible in order to promote technologies such as the CD, the DVD and the Blu-Ray/Cell.
 

DrKeo

Member
Mar 3, 2019
1,726
Israel
I only talked about their gaming division. Their profits during the PS1 and PS2 eras were laughable compared to their perceived success (there is no point mentioning the gigantic losses during the PS3 era). They cared more about selling the hardware way below cost to as many people as possible in order to promote technologies such as the CD, the DVD and the Blu-Ray/Cell.
PS1-3 were all profitable, it's just the PS4 was so successful and break-even almost from day one that it makes PS1-3 look bad in comparison. If PSN and all the subscription services they have didn't exist (like they didn't exist in PS1-2 and were very small in PS3), PS4 wouldn't have been anything special regarding profitability in comparison to previous generations. Actually, now is the best time for them to go wild with hardware and taking loses considering the popularity of PSN and their subscription services.
 

Axel Stone

Member
Jan 10, 2020
348
ZHugeEx and Benji think the cheapest retail price for PS5 would be $450. Futter seems to think $499 is an inevitability.
At those prices, I think a $299 Lockhart would sell like gangbusters.

I am proud to announce the controller will include face buttons.
Since switching to the Elite, face buttons are an unnecessary extravagance for me. Can I have a cheaper console with no face buttons, please?
 

Colbert

Member
Oct 27, 2017
5,780
Germany
PS1-3 were all profitable, it's just the PS4 was so successful and break-even almost from day one that it makes PS1-3 look bad in comparison. If PSN and all the subscription services they have didn't exist, PS4 wouldn't have been anything special regarding profitability in comparison to previous generations. Actually, now is the best time for them to go wild with hardware and taking loses considering the popularity of PSN and their subscription services.
|OT12| - Time to go wild with hardware
 
Dec 27, 2019
674
Surprisingly, there is no mention of Microsoft and its Xbox Series X console in this reporting. Microsoft's console also uses many high-end components, and its price is not expected to be as low as the One X or One S, which remain as options for consumers. Indeed, one report says that Series X's SSD may actually be DRAM-less – a first in this market – which could help Microsoft skirt this supply issue, at least partially. The solution for Microsoft, which is unconfirmed, is the reliance on Phison's newer PS5019-E19T flash memory controller.
 

Nostradamus

Member
Oct 28, 2017
1,037
PS1-3 were all profitable, it's just the PS4 was so successful and break-even almost from day-one that makes PS1-3 look bad. If PSN and all the subscription services they have didn't exist, PS4 wouldn't have been anything special regarding profitability in comparison to previous generations. Actually, now is the best time for them to go wild with hardware and taking loses considering the popularity of PSN and their subscription services.
First of all, the PS3 wasn't profitable AT ALL. It led to billions of losses across the whole generation. Only the last two fiscal years showed tiny profits which of course weren't anywhere close to offset the losses from the first 4.

Second of all, the PS2 was a gigantic success with almost 160m consoles sold and 1.5 billion games sold (both figures are a lot higher than the PS4's) and still had maybe a third or less of the PS4's profits. That's not just because the PS4 sold a lot but also because Sony focused on profitability by offering hardware at cost.

You might think that PlayStation has always been an extremely lucrative business, but it wasn't. Nintendo has traditionally been more profitable for example even during their struggling generations (although their portables market helped a lot as well).
 

VX1

Member
Oct 28, 2017
6,225
Europe
I posted in the BOM thread earlier that PS4 UK sales ( and most products to be fair) slowed sharply after the initial sales. 250K launch weekend, 530K after 5 weeks and 1 million after 9 months. This at £349.
I think people on game forums like Era underestimate how price sensitive console mass market is. $299 or even $349 Lockhart would wipe the floor with both $499 Series X and PS5 saleswise during 2021.MS wouldn’t care cause it’s still their ecosystem but what is Sony supposed to do?
 

LordBlodgett

Member
Jan 10, 2020
223
Is NAND really that much cheaper than DRAM?

Edit: This was a dumb question.....Looked it up. I doubt Microsoft is saving a whole lot by going DRAM-less on their SSD. The amount of DRAM put into SSDs is usually not very big. The expensive DRAM in these consoles is going to be the GDDR6 RAM, and both consoles are going to have that
 
Last edited:

Thera

Member
Feb 28, 2019
2,619
The SSD is Cerny’s baby. The way he hypes it I want to think it will still live up to claim of faster than anything available on PC market. I am really ready for another Wired article if we get nothing else.
If there is hardware decompression and reading speed optimisation, the benefit may be huge.
Depends how much Sony is pumping into that custom SSD I guess
Custom doesn't always means more expensive. Research cost, sure, but the BOM doesn't included it.
 

Belvedere

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,315
Isn't Lockhart 4tf? Unless it's marketed as next-gen which wouldn't be the case, why is it assumed it will be flying off the shelves? If anything doesn't the existence of another similarly named product in the Xbox family further confuse anyone outside of the enthusiasts category?
 

VX1

Member
Oct 28, 2017
6,225
Europe
Isn't Lockhart 4tf? Unless it's marketed as next-gen which wouldn't be the case, why is it assumed it will be flying off the shelves? If anything doesn't the existence of another similarly named product in the Xbox family further confuse anyone outside of the enthusiasts category?
Of course Lockhart will be the next gen console-affordable model for those who still play on 1080p TVs.
 

Thera

Member
Feb 28, 2019
2,619
I think people on game forums like Era underestimate how price sensitive console mass market is. $299 or even $349 Lockhart would wipe the floor with both $499 Series X and PS5 saleswise during 2021.MS wouldn’t care cause it’s still their ecosystem but what is Sony supposed to do?
And you underestimate most country outside of USA are loyal to a brand. PS3 survived because of that.
 

Manmademan

Member
Aug 6, 2018
6,856
I think people on game forums like Era underestimate how price sensitive console mass market is. $299 or even $349 Lockhart would wipe the floor with both $499 Series X and PS5 saleswise during 2021.MS wouldn’t care cause it’s still their ecosystem but what is Sony supposed to do?
The market is so price sensitive the PS4 MSRP is still $299.99 over 6 years after launch, and it's speedily cruising towards 120m units.
 

Axel Stone

Member
Jan 10, 2020
348
Isn't Lockhart 4tf? Unless it's marketed as next-gen which wouldn't be the case, why is it assumed it will be flying off the shelves? If anything doesn't the existence of another similarly named product in the Xbox family further confuse anyone outside of the enthusiasts category?
It will be marketed as next gen, and my guess is that Microsoft will cease production on earlier Xboxes fairly quickly after next gen starts. Also, consumers seem to be able to work out the difference between similarly-named products, to borrow a comparison from earlier in the thread, they seem to be able to manage it with iPhones.

Off-topic: I bloody love Idles, me.
 

anexanhume

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,753
I think people on game forums like Era underestimate how price sensitive console mass market is. $299 or even $349 Lockhart would wipe the floor with both $499 Series X and PS5 saleswise during 2021.MS wouldn’t care cause it’s still their ecosystem but what is Sony supposed to do?
When Xbox 360 and PS3 launched, weren’t the pricier SKUs the better selling ones?
 

VX1

Member
Oct 28, 2017
6,225
Europe
And you underestimate most country outside of USA are loyal to a brand. PS3 survived because of that.
Of course i don’t underestimate that, i myself don’t live in US either :)
But with only one $499 model against both $499 and $299/$349 models from their main competitor , PS5 would have big problems in US & UK markets at least and i can not imagine why would Sony want to take that risk.
 

AGE2019

Member
May 5, 2019
102
I'm start seeing a 500€ - 600€ scenario
This has been my belief for years now. $400 just doesn't go too far when you're talking about cutting edge technology. That extra $100 will help these consoles not feel outdated at launch. $500 PS5, $600 XSX and $350 XSS.


I really don’t see what’s the big deal with Sony selling PS5 at ~ $100 loss during the first year or so ,especially now when they have constant and stable income from PSN and PS+ .
I think it is a big deal for a business to take a loss for what amounts to luxury electronics.
The world economy is in a good place and expecting a business to take a loss to benefit the consumer just doesn't make sense right now.
Expecting Sony, MS or Nintendo to take a loss on HW during a strong economy is unreasonable imo.

Another thing, what if the prices on these APU's don't drop as fast as in the past? Sony or MS could quickly be in a bad situation that they find difficult to climb out of. Too risky these days where semiconductor prices have been holding strong.
I rather they sell at cost than see one of them drop out of the Console HW business.
 

Seshumaru

Member
Oct 27, 2017
797
The Netherlands
Of course i don’t underestimate that, i myself don’t live in US either :)
But with only one $499 model against both $499 and $299/$349 models from their main competitor , PS5 would have big problems in US & UK markets at least and i can not imagine why would Sony want to take that risk.
lol you are really underestimating Sony's appeal world wide. Even in the US and UK you are underestimating.... Just because something happen 10 years ago doesn't mean it is going to happen again. Especially now that Sony has a first party stable worth a damn.
 

DrKeo

Member
Mar 3, 2019
1,726
Israel
First of all, the PS3 wasn't profitable AT ALL. It led to billions of losses across the whole generation. Only the last two fiscal years showed tiny profits which of course weren't anywhere close to offset the losses from the first 4.

Second of all, the PS2 was a gigantic success with almost 160m consoles sold and 1.5 billion games sold (both figures are a lot higher than the PS4's) and still had maybe a third or less of the PS4's profits. That's not just because the PS4 sold a lot but also because Sony focused on profitability by offering hardware at cost.

You might think that PlayStation has always been an extremely lucrative business, but it wasn't. Nintendo has traditionally been more profitable for example even during their struggling generations (although their portables market helped a lot as well).
You are right, I shouldn't have said PS3, but the PS3 was a cluster-f in more than one way. The PS1 and 2 on the other hand were very profitable for Sony. Just because PS4 is more profitable per customer because it's 2020 and you have things that didn't exist 20 years ago (PSN, DLC and Subscription services) doesn't take away from the PS1 and PS2 achievement and profitability.

(Graph by ZhugeEX. 150K represent ~1.4 billion dollars in 2020 conversion)


Oh, and Nintendo is still more profitable today even though they only have one console on the market and PS4 is still booming way more PS1-3 ever did.
 
Last edited:

Belvedere

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,315
It will be marketed as next gen, and my guess is that Microsoft will cease production on earlier Xboxes fairly quickly after next gen starts. Also, consumers seem to be able to work out the difference between similarly-named products, to borrow a comparison from earlier in the thread, they seem to be able to manage it with iPhones.

Off-topic: I bloody love Idles, me.
Hell yes my man, great stuff the world needs right now.

And yeah, I'm just curious to see how Microsoft markets the future Xbox family. Is the new series next gen or capabilities what defines next gen? 2020 machine(s) or 4k, etc.

It's obviously all been talked about to death in this thread but I think that only highlights the slightly more complex purchasing options next-gen.
 

Dave.

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,831
There are some flags but doesn't mean all of it is BS. The idea that "most manufacturers spend less than $1 on cooling" was a red flag. Raw materials alone, even looking at PS4/xbone coolers, would be higher than that. History of Bloomberg making up news and misquoting, inserting legit info within speculation, also raised flags.
Why is no other site coming forth with similar info?
As for Zhuge backing up this article, I think he's just saying the BOM is inline with what he's heard.
Yeah, there's a pretty large difference between "Yeah, I have also heard the price of DRAM is increasing which will obviously affect console launches", to "I have also heard the PS5 BOM is about $450" (I think this is what he meant, personally), and "I have also heard it normally costs only $1 for console cooling systems and have also heard this time Sony are going with an unprecedentedly opulent $2 APU cooling extravaganza".
 

Nebuzel

Member
Oct 27, 2017
55
I think some y’all seriously underestimate PlayStations brand worldwide.
Up until the very end of the generation, both PS3 and 360 had sold about 85 million units. Now at the end of this generation, we can envision PS4 getting close to 120 million and XBox One at 50+ million. Obviously both companies are at work trying to figure out a way to push beyond the sales ceiling around this number. We actually see Microsoft's preparation with the way they are trying to expand their ecosystem with Gamepass and Project xCloud.

Approaching this upcoming generation, you can clearly see that while Microsoft wants to battle in the traditional console space, it wants to aggressively pursue an audience that is outside of the traditional console space to break that 170 million ceiling. The question is how do you reach these people? Sony isn't going to be sitting around twirling their thumbs either. Microsoft has been outwardly more aggressive in this pursuit, but i'm sure there are ideas being brainstormed by Sony to try and figure out a way to make a new ceiling. What needs to be done to get to 200 million?
 
Jan 19, 2020
49
This may be a dumb question so I apologize in advance if it is: since Sony now manufactures their own consumer SSDs is it possible or likely that they will save a significant amount of money by using their own R&D/facilities to produce the SSD going in the PS5 instead of getting it from a third-party?
 

Mass Nerder

Member
Apr 17, 2019
58
Can we PLEASE split this thread now? We are at nauseating and transparent fanboy/console war levels.
I genuinely fear for the mental health of a few posters here once the price and stats of both consoles are revealed.
 

MykhellMikado

Member
Jan 13, 2020
457
There are some flags but doesn't mean all of it is BS. The idea that "most manufacturers spend less than $1 on cooling" was a red flag. Raw materials alone, even looking at PS4/xbone coolers, would be higher than that.
the cooling solution on the PS4s were just a tiny plastic fan and small heat sink. Easily under $1 even manufactured when purchased in bulk.
 
Oct 27, 2017
317
The Ether
Just a reminder that this past generation was an anomaly:
Console ---- BOM ---- MSRP ---- Differance ---- Difference adjusted to inflation
PS1 ---------- 430$ ----- 299$ ------- 131$ ----------------- $223
PS2 ---------- 479$ ----- 299$ ------- 180$ ----------------- $271
PS3 ---------- 805$ ----- 599$ ------- 206$ ----------------- $267
360 ---------- 525$ ----- 399$ ------- 126$ ----------------- $167

Will it be optimal for Sony to sell the PS5 at 399$? Probably not. Is there zero chance of them selling it for 399, a 51$ difference between MSRP and BOM, if they feel that they really have to? No, there is a chance. Actually, it will be their smallest BOM to MSRP difference after the PS4.

This is great info. Do you have links to sources by chance?