PlayStation 5 - Now with FAQ in OP.

TitianGerm

The Raging Bile Duct wrote: »

I'm on the Wage Subsidy Scheme at the moment in work and I don't know what the potential blowback is in relation to a tax bill at the end of it all so €600 for a console that looks like it's going to have a piss poor selection of launch titles is not going to be a priority.

If your take home pay is still the same (excluding any tax refunds) I'd suggest looking at a payslip from before you went on the scheme and add up the PAYE, USC and PRSI EE deductions. Then try save that amount each week for as long as you're on the scheme and it should cover the taxes you'll owe.

Markitron

Penn wrote: »

Agreed, and unlike the PS4 and XB1, backwards compatibility comes as standard now, so you'll still have PS4 games to play on it that you might have been playing over Xmas anyway

Yea, I am selling my PS4 Pro after I finish TLOU2, which should be the end of next week. That essentially means Ghosts of Tsushima a launch title for me too. Even if they don't properly patch it, I will still be able to play it at PS4 Pro settings with no load times so its a win win.

Stone Deaf 4evr

Markitron wrote: »

Well I am just going by the rumours, which were accurate in every other respect. Considering MS's current push for cloud gaming, the lockhart being a streaming box is an extremely safe bet. If they were gonna do a disc-less XSX they probably would have just shown it already like sony did with the PS5.

I think they will keep the S as their entry base model, otherwise they wouldn't have made such a big deal about every game running on every XB1/XSX model. If anything I think the 1X will be phased out for the XSX.

Well, if you think about it, when you say a 'streaming box', I assume you mean something that uses Xcloud, which currently works on phones, so should be fairly handily run on any of the current gen consoles.
MS have said in the past, that while they can see the value of cloud gaming, the hardcore fan will demand the lowest latency / highest graphical fidelity, and this is who the series X is for.
By making the current one X the 'lesser' model, you still get a graphical leap above the baseline consoles, and a console with a bit more horsepower for the cross generation titles. The X can regularly be bought for about €250 now, so a recased, optical drive free version for €200 would surely be tempting to a lot of people.

Also. typing all that further drives home how awful the whole S/X/SX naming convention is for discussion purposes. :rolleyes:

Mitch Connor

Stone Deaf 4evr wrote: »

Also. typing all that further drives home how awful the whole S/X/SX naming convention is for discussion purposes. :rolleyes:

It's tricky, tricky (Tricky) tricky

Markitron

Stone Deaf 4evr wrote: »

Also. typing all that further drives home how awful the whole S/X/SX naming convention is for discussion purposes. :rolleyes:

Agreed, I really don't know what they were thinking. To really make sense it would need 2 or 3 more consoles over the next decade or so. Until then it is just stupid.

CastorTroy

I think 1 of the companies needs to "leak" their price. This way they can gauge people's reactions and the other company can announce their price. Then the first company can officially announce their price based on that.

If that makes sense

keyboard_cat

Retr0gamer wrote: »

The other thing to remember is game prices will go up again as they do at the start of every generation. Expect 80-70 euro to be the norm until the audience grows large enough to sustain deep discounts.

Yup when the PS4 launched I remember buying new games off www.videogamesplus.ca for about 45 euro shipped. same games were 65-70 anywhere else.

All the more reason to get the disk version it will pay for itself very quickly after a few used games or discounted physical games are purchased

TheIrishGrover

Stone Deaf 4evr wrote: »

No one knows what it its at the moment in fairness.

My own theory, is that they'll phase out the exisiting 'S' and possibly repackage the current X as the lower tier model.

Well, yeah, that's what I meant. They have already confirmed that there would be two versions of the high end device: One with optic drive and one without. Like the PS5, apart from that, it is exactly the same.

Yeah, the rumours are that the Lockheart is a different device altogether. As you said, streaming. Of course this could be all the remains of the very early rumours. One of the very first rumours was that there would be two devices.

If true then I would actually be concerned if I were buying an Xbox. I would rather not splash out for the tip-top device if all games were designed to work on the core system but be "enhanced" for the top tier device. One device will thrive and the other will die. Either the core or the high-end and do you want to spend money on the Betamax/HD-DVD?

I was burned with the PS-Pro. The "enhancements" were non-existant as it was not worth the studios spending extra money.

Homelander

Burned? The big games all look and run best on the One X, followed by the PS4 Pro. Some offer 60fps performance v 30fps visual mode. They do exactly what they set out to do.

Cienciano

Markitron wrote: »

Tbh I have always thought the console/phone comparisons to be utter nonsense.

But people will pay €300k for a house. Surely they'll pay €500 for a console

BloodBath

Greyfox wrote: »

People are use to a new console been around about a certain price, I can see it launching for €550 which ill be fine with. €800 on launch is not going to happen, they would of had the €400 - €600 price range in mind all along as €800 would be a guarenteed online backlash from gamers and the media focusing on the word expensive.

Not a chance of €400-500.

We're talking about at least £750 worth of hardware in these things. It will be at least £599 sterling imo.

The biggest loss Sony will stomach selling them is £100-150 per unit.

shaveAbullock

BloodBath wrote: »

Not a chance of €400-500.

We're talking about at least £750 worth of hardware in these things. It will be at least £599 sterling imo.

The biggest loss Sony will stomach selling them is £100-150 per unit.

I agree but I think it's difficult for people to see the value as there has been no demo to show off the processing power these consoles are capable of.
People will come around to the idea of the higher price point once more games are previewed.

BloodBath

Microsofts will be around the same no doubt. There's a reason they are also releasing a lower spec machine. The top one will be expensive.

The lower spec one will still play the same games but at a lower resolution/framerate, lower specs and price obviously.

Markitron

Markitron wrote: »

Tbh I have always thought the console/phone comparisons to be utter nonsense.

Don't see why. You will in all probability have a console for several years, many phones are significantly more expensive and are replaced more often. Sony could come out and price it at say 600 and people will go mad complaining it's too expensive etc, yet have no bother shelling out far more to apple every time an incrementally updated iphone comes out.

shuffles03

I know this won’t happen but I saw a fan console pic on Twitter. Now THAT’S a version I would pay over the odds to own!

Another guy on Twitter tagged Matt MacLaurin (VP of UX design at PlayStation) asking if we could expect a matte black finish.

Matt replied saying that the PS5 will be customisable in ways previous gens weren’t.

Faceplates?

shuffles03

Here’s a closeup:

earthwormjack

BloodBath wrote: »

Not a chance of €400-500.

We're talking about at least £750 worth of hardware in these things. It will be at least £599 sterling imo.

The biggest loss Sony will stomach selling them is £100-150 per unit.

Not a hope these will be 600 sterling.It's DOA if that's the case. Going by reports earlier in the year, manufacturing costs are estimated to be $450 per console.

Can't remember if that was proven true or not though.

shaveAbullock

earthwormjack wrote: »

Not a hope these will be 600 sterling.It's DOA if that's the case. Going by reports earlier in the year, manufacturing costs are estimated to be $450 per console.

Can't remember if that was proven true or not though.

DOA?

What do you think would happen if both series x and PS5 had a release price of £599?

Homelander

People will still buy it. The real problem for either is one undercutting the other. MS have everything to lose in this regard with the Xbox One in general being a massive slip in market share as it is.

I wouldn't be shocked to see them take a really aggressive approach this time around to try claw back.

Sony had a rough time with the PS3 at launch due to it's crazy price compared to the 360. The 60Gb PS3 was $600 and they were still making losses at that price point per console.

MS really making a bit of a balls of the naming schemes though, imo. I mean, PS4, PS4 Pro, PS5. Grand. No confusion. But Xbox One, Xbox One S, Xbox One X, Xbox Series X, and the as of yet unrevealed cheaper console/future consoles....

Apparently for the 360 they considered just calling it Xbox 3 to rival the PS3. Would've made things much easier.

You often hear things like "I'd be happy to pay €700"

While there are indeed many who will pay that, Sony are interested in what 100 million people will pay. They want to come in at a launch price that gets them off to a good start. Publishers want to see strong first-year sales, it's what greenlights big-budget games. Investors want to see strong first-year sales. Sony themselves want it because it sets you up well for the generation. PS4 did 15m units in the first 12 months, which was fantastic and a feat they will surely want to replicate.

You don't get strong first year sales with a €700 console. For proof of that you look at the sales figures of previous consoles, the public reception, comments from executives etc. You can even look at the recent Pro systems - the base systems continue to outsell them around 4:1 because they're cheaper. Like it or not the average console buyer is extremely price sensitive.

Like most I think there's no way they can break even at $399 (which they did with the PS4). But I think that price was a target for them once again and they will take a loss on the all-digital model and price it at $399 or very close. I don't see the with-disc model being over $499.

earthwormjack

shaveAbullock wrote: »

DOA?

What do you think would happen if both series x and PS5 had a release price of £599?

Dead on arrival. If they release at £599 one of them will sell very little. The other will sell pretty much nothing imo.

HairySalmon

shuffles03 wrote: »

I know this won’t happen but I saw a fan console pic on Twitter. Now THAT’S a version I would pay over the odds to own!

Another guy on Twitter tagged Matt MacLaurin (VP of UX design at PlayStation) asking if we could expect a matte black finish.

Matt replied saying that the PS5 will be customisable in ways previous gens weren’t.

Faceplates?

More like the white plastic wings will be replaceable

Homelander

This generation's consoles are significantly more expensive to manufacture though.

Like, even in 2013, the Xbox One and PS4's base spec of the custom Jaguar CPU was pretty low-end by by 2013 standards, though the GPU was decent but not high-end either.

This time around both consoles are sporting significantly more powerful upgrades relative to their release dates.

Basically a 3700X processor plus a 5700XT/2070 Super class of GPU. Comparable to a higher-end PC now, whereas the Xbox One and PS4 were more comparable to more budget friendly PC even in 2013.

If the XSX and PS5 had specs that were more comparable to what the new gen had in 2013 - we'd probably be looking at something like a Ryzen 1st gen based CPU and 5600XT class graphics card. Which would be significantly cheaper.

This time around they're really chasing brute power and a big leap in performance.

Potential-Monke

HairySalmon wrote: »

More like the white plastic wings will be replaceable

Yeah, they haven't said straight up, but I reckon from the few bits that were captured before being deleted had Sony’s VP of UX design at PlayStation, Matt MacLaurin stating that the hardware will be customisable "in ways previous gens weren’t", so I reckon replacable parts. Most likely white/black release and you can replace the white parts with black parts. Which I will.

BloodBath

earthwormjack wrote: »

Not a hope these will be 600 sterling.It's DOA if that's the case. Going by reports earlier in the year, manufacturing costs are estimated to be $450 per console.

Can't remember if that was proven true or not though.

Well I can tell you that article is nonsense. Nobody can be sure on the exact cost but I can guarantee you it's not that low.

The SSD alone in this thing would cost at least £100 to manufacture and the PC equivalents are selling around the £200 mark.

CPU cost at least £150, PC equivalent retailing for £250.

RX 5700XT+ class GPU with 16GB GDDR6 is going to cost at least £250. Would retail at £400+ if there was a PC equivalent. A regular 8GB 5700xt retails at £350+.

A PCIe Gen 4 capable board, at least £40. Cooling unit, case, PSU and controller at least another £50.

That's a fairly conservative estimate that comes in at £700.

HairySalmon

BloodBath wrote: »

Well I can tell you that article is nonsense. Nobody can be sure on the exact cost but I can guarantee you it's not that low.

The SSD alone in this thing would cost at least £100 to manufacture and the PC equivalents are selling around the £200 mark.

CPU cost at least £150, PC equivalent retailing for £250.

RX 5700XT+ class GPU with 16GB GDDR6 is going to cost at least £250. Would retail at £400+ if there was a PC equivalent. A regular 8GB 5700xt retails at £350+.

A PCIe Gen 4 capable board, at least £40. Cooling unit, case, PSU and controller at least another £50.

That's a fairly conservative estimate that comes in at £700.

MS and Sony will be buying components in extraordinary bulk, so that will reduce cost substantially. AMD appreciates how lucrative gaming was to them in 2013 when they weren't giving anywhere near the same competition to Nvidia as they are now, and console gaming really propped them up, so I would imagine there has been some agreements and deals made to get the best value from them.

Plus, subscription services and digital game sales will allow them to take larger loses on hardware to get people in the door.

I very much doubt they ever intended for these machines to retail over 600, let alone 700.

I would buy one, but I'd be pushed - and I'm an enthusiast! The general public, who overwhelmingly are families or causal gamers just looking for FIFA and COD. They're not going to purchase for years at 500 until price cuts come in, so they'll be waiting longer if it's priced at 700.

Mike3287

BloodBath wrote: »

Well I can tell you that article is nonsense. Nobody can be sure on the exact cost but I can guarantee you it's not that low.

The SSD alone in this thing would cost at least £100 to manufacture and the PC equivalents are selling around the £200 mark.

CPU cost at least £150, PC equivalent retailing for £250.

RX 5700XT+ class GPU with 16GB GDDR6 is going to cost at least £250. Would retail at £400+ if there was a PC equivalent. A regular 8GB 5700xt retails at £350+.

A PCIe Gen 4 capable board, at least £40. Cooling unit, case, PSU and controller at least another £50.

That's a fairly conservative estimate that comes in at £700.

PC users have been robbed blind for years, €1200 for an RTX 2080 ti, laughable prices

AMD are in bed with the console manufacturers, bread and butter for them

They'll be making 50 million SOC a year for them, stock price shot up when they won those next gen contracts, its what keeps them afloat, they need them

PS5 and XSX will be €500 for sure and have rtx 2070/2080 performance, will be amazing machines

Sony and MS are paying no where near €400 for that SOC from AMD for 3700x/5700xt+ combo, more like €150-€200 max

Thats the kind of savings you get from a 150 million part order

If AMD only made €20 profit per part thats €3,000,000,000 profit.

shaveAbullock

Both are valid points. Perhaps it will be down to how much they are willing to lose on each unit.
€100? That's no problem.
But €150 or €200 loss to sell to many people who only pay for the live service and buy one or two games a year (COD, Fifa) would be a massive hit to take.

HairySalmon

shaveAbullock wrote: »

Both are valid points. Perhaps it will be down to how much they are willing to lose on each unit.
€100? That's no problem.
But €150 or €200 loss to sell to many people who only pay for the live service and buy one or two games a year (COD, Fifa) would be a massive hit to take.

PS5's BOM is rumoured to be $450, whereas PS4's was around $380.

It's going to be around $500, and they may use the digital edition to push down to $450, maybe even $400 considering the increased margin for digital games.

Think about it, you have PS Plus, Xbox Live Gold, PS Now and GamePass with the potential to generate a lot of revenue that is consistent and regular.

It would be less lucrative to have a disk only console that you bought one game on a year versus paying for PS Plus and PS Now only which would bring in more revenue for you per annum more consistently.

shaveAbullock

HairySalmon wrote: »

PS5's BOM is rumoured to be $450, whereas PS4's was around $380.

Article was from before COVID lockdowns took their toll.
If supply issues were driving prices up at that stage what do you think it has done since?