Support NeoGAF

[THE:MILKMAN]

Ps4 was sold at a small loss and selling the ps5 at 500 with a BOM of 450 will still be at loss. BOM doesn't take into account marketing and often, depending on who made the BOM estimate, distribution and retailer margin.

BOMs can also be overestimated. PS3 was overestimated to the tune of $175 per IHS because most of the parts costs have to be guessed. IHS also suggest that the EU subsidised the PS3's NA loss. I would therefore assume the PS4's estimated $381 was too.

 

[Johnny Silver]

449€ disk less version and 499€ disk version if Sony wants to shorten the profit margin but maximize market penetration without having loses on the hardware.

499€ disk less version and 549€ disk version if Sony wants a more comfortable profit margin but at the expense of market penetration.

 

[Salmon Snake]

I'm going crazy but I predict:
Digital version will be 399€
Disc-drive version will be 499€

Sony will want that PS4 399$ moment and in the long run they'll make the money back with the PSN.
Hundred euros is a bit much price difference between models, but lets make things a bit interesting around here.

 

[GreatnessRD]

did they specifically say storage is identical tho?

Yes.

What's the difference between the all-digital PS5 and the standard one? Obviously there's a disc, but are you focusing on more storage?

As you saw, there is a small difference in the form factor of the two consoles. I'm sure you also observed, the basic design aesthetic is consistent between them. So there is that and the fact that the digital edition does not have a disk drive. That is it. Other than that, they are identical products.

Sony's PS5 design is 'bold, daring and future facing," PlayStation CEO says

The PlayStation head, in an interview with CNET, discusses the new PS5 design, launch games like Spider-Man, and pre-orders.

www.cnet.com

 

[Bankai]

I'm going crazy but I predict:
Digital version will be 399€
Disc-drive version will be 499€

Sony will want that PS4 399$ moment and in the long run they'll make the money back with the PSN.
Hundred euros is a bit much price difference between models, but lets make things a bit interesting around here.

This would be an excellent move. I would never consider a disc-less version (because of second hand games and BC), but 100 pricedifference.. that's a lot.

 

[vdopey]

The same people who have spent all week crying about others not agreeing with them that TLoU2 is the greatest game ever made, accusing the most highly regarded and reputed gaming journalism of bias, because they didn't hear what they wanted.

Really activates the almonds.

I'm confused who / what is this: " accusing the most highly regarded and reputed gaming journalism of bias" ??

 

[Salmon Snake]

This would be an excellent move. I would never consider a disc-less version (because of second hand games and BC), but 100 pricedifference.. that's a lot.

Yeah I will get the one with the disc drive because I don't want to shut myself away from physical media. Even though I rarely buy discs. I will want to get BBC's nature documentaries on UHD.

 

[MetalRain]

I think both versions will be $599 at launch, but digital version will come with 6 months/year of prepaid PSN+. It doesn't really cost them that much and might even make customers to purchase more games. If Xbox is much cheaper they can probably lower to 549.

 

[seanoff]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blu-ray_Disc_Association

They manufacture them (probably actually foxxcon in china, stamped with a sony logo) and were one of the inventors, hence why I said they are at "cost" they are on the board of directors for blu-ray disc association and probably earn money from patents for each of the uhd br / br drives sold as they are one of the licensors of the tech also per film / game sold:
https://www.one-blue.com/licensors/

Microsoft is probably paying more than Sony per drive and per disc (they quite possibly maybe using Sony drives), so its interesting that Sony are releasing an all digital version and they will probably take a hit on each digital version sold. Manufacturing and printing uhd br discs, boxes and box art cant be cheap, then shipping / handling etc etc.. none of that logistical nonsense to take care of with a digital download. I still prefer to have a uhd br drive though, choice is a great thing,

yeah. Nah.

back in 2005 or so MS Office came in those plastic boxes with the little install manual and disc etc. the cost for the whole thing was something like 20 cents. The most expensive thing was the little manual. Transport and holding costs for the physical games will be more expensive than producing them.

 

[vdopey]

yeah. Nah.

back in 2005 or so MS Office came in those plastic boxes with the little install manual and disc etc. the cost for the whole thing was something like 20 cents. The most expensive thing was the little manual. Transport and holding costs for the physical games will be more expensive than producing them.

Fair enough.

 

[MilkyJoe]

Didn't that xbox one digital tell us something?

 

[Hunnybun]

Why does anyone expect $599? Don't we already have an estimated BOM of $450? If that's in any way accurate there's not a chance of $599 - even $499 would represent less of a loss than usual.

Quite apart from the fact that it's just not a price point they'd have aimed for when developing the machine, it's far too unattractive for a mass market device.

I did think the diskless version would be $399 but if what DF says about their extra profit from digital games only being $8 is true, then that looks like a stretch. Probably gonna be $449.

 

[AncientOrigin]

The strategy should be clear.The Digital edition should be max 399 or better 349.The normal PS5 costs Sony probably between 400–450 to make.Sony gets everything cheaper,because they sell so many consoles volume is important when you make deals.It is the best for Sony to sell as many digital editions as possible.The ones who bought the digital edition can’t buy used games or new games,which means every game sold is pure profit for Sony ifs its their own game.No production costs no shipping no retail all this takes atleast 20 from an 60 dollar game.The best plan for Sony would be to be even on the normal PS5 and a few Dollar negativ on the digital Edition.it Must look really appealing for an customer to buy the digital edition which will bring Sony a fortune in the next 7–8 years.Digital should be 350 finish also the competition immediately.450 for normal 100 Dollar difference will make most people buy the digital edition.And kids will get it from their parents because it’s cheap.Sony would be really dumm to introduce the digital at 399 especially nonsense like 449 and normal 499.Microsoft could come with 399 or 449 and make ads Ike the most powerful consoles which also plays used games and disc games same money as the digital version from Sony.would make Sony look overpriced and bad.It would be an missed opportunity by sony.Sony already missed the opportunity to produce their own SSD like the vita cards make it 50 dollars more than the ones on the market and everyone must buy bigger SSDs only from Sony which bring lots of money in.I am curious to what they will do.

 

[Coney]

I'm expecting a $50 price difference, but I wouldn't even be surprised if it's the exact same price because of dat form factor. I don't know if Sony is willing to lose the money on the table knowing they're confident in their market position. They may not feel the need to have any price difference.

 

[ZywyPL]

I think the difference between the two models will be at least 100$, but not to make up for the drawbacks the digital-only version has, but to actually push people exactly into that version, so Sony can make unimaginable money on digital distribution - no second hand market, no retail distribution = more units sold, and at higher profit. I can even see them willing to artificially bump the regular PS5 price by 50$, just so people's eyes would point towards the digital edition even more.

 

[NXGamer]

Why does anyone expect $599? Don't we already have an estimated BOM of $450? If that's in any way accurate there's not a chance of $599 - even $499 would represent less of a loss than usual.

Quite apart from the fact that it's just not a price point they'd have aimed for when developing the machine, it's far too unattractive for a mass market device.

I did think the diskless version would be $399 but if what DF says about their extra profit from digital games only being $8 is true, then that looks like a stretch. Probably gonna be $449.

Yeah... thats not how the business model works at all. The basis is on the accrual of projected sales and logistical reductions outside of just the Game model. A spinning media disc device, for an example, as more factored into the life cycle cost that just the bricks and mortar and supply chain.

 

[Iced Arcade]

Ignoring everything else... The diskless version is a lot more visually appealing than the regular. Doesn't have that fugly dad belly on it.

 

[Hunnybun]

Yeah... thats not how the business model works at all. The basis is on the accrual of projected sales and logistical reductions outside of just the Game model. A spinning media disc device, for an example, as more factored into the life cycle cost that just the bricks and mortar and supply chain.

I honestly don't understand your point.

 

[MasterCornholio]

Didn't that xbox one digital tell us something?

That pricing is key for a diskless console?

 

[NXGamer]

I honestly don't understand your point.

Apologies, you are correct I did not make it clear.

I was referring to this line:- "I did think the diskless version would be $399 but if what DF says about their extra profit from digital games only being $8 is true, then that looks like a stretch. Probably gonna be $449. "

The Cost of the Digitial game alone is not the driving factor on the costing model at play here.

 

[Chromata]

It would be a big move for Sony if they pull off a $100 cheaper diskless version. I'd expect that to sell exceptionally well given that many people stream movies nowadays and digital game sales have risen over time.

It's good to see that both companies are making smart moves at the start of next gen, should be a great one.

 

[onQ123]

The disc drive don't cost enough to really change the price so they will most likely be the same price but the digital might come with a extra game or something.

 

[MastaKiiLA]

I think both versions will be $599 at launch, but digital version will come with 6 months/year of prepaid PSN+. It doesn't really cost them that much and might even make customers to purchase more games. If Xbox is much cheaper they can probably lower to 549.

I like this idea (same price with PS+ bundle). It works for me, eventhough it's not a great value. I don't see the $600 price though. I think it prices it out of the summer job range, which is probably still a thing these days. I expect $500, but maybe that's wishful thinking.

 

[Grinchy]

The disc drive don't cost enough to really change the price so they will most likely be the same price but the digital might come with a extra game or something.

Yeah, that's definitely the other direction they could go.

Instead of actually taking a hit up front on the hardware to make it back on the guaranteed digital sales moving forward, they could just charge the same price while bundling a first party game. I could imagine it launching with the Spiderman Lost Legacy game or something.

But I also don't think it'd be crazy of them to reduce the cost by $50 or even $100 to entice people into that sweet digital-only nectar that everyone is dying to get. But bundling a game is obviously a way more profitable way to achieve it.

 

[Hunnybun]

Apologies, you are correct I did not make it clear.

I was referring to this line:- "I did think the diskless version would be $399 but if what DF says about their extra profit from digital games only being $8 is true, then that looks like a stretch. Probably gonna be $449. "

The Cost of the Digitial game alone is not the driving factor on the costing model at play here.

Lol sorry I still don't understand. Like literally I can't follow what your post is supposed to be relating, even before the issue of how it relates to what I posted...

Sorry.

 

[EverydayBeast]

Gamers have switched to digital and you have to remember digital games offends collectors.

 

[NXGamer]

Lol sorry I still don't understand. Like literally I can't follow what your post is supposed to be relating, even before the issue of how it relates to what I posted...

Sorry.

The fact an $8 per game profit increase (potential) is not the main contributing factor into WHAT a CED is sold at or its target. It is much bigger and more involved that that , thus a $100 reduction is possible for a Digital version IF all other things remain the same aside the UHD.

 

[Thirty7ven]

Apologies, you are correct I did not make it clear.

I was referring to this line:- "I did think the diskless version would be $399 but if what DF says about their extra profit from digital games only being $8 is true, then that looks like a stretch. Probably gonna be $449. "

The Cost of the Digitial game alone is not the driving factor on the costing model at play here.

Can you delve deeper?

Do people who go digital spend more on games and services?

 

[Codes 208]

Didn't that xbox one digital tell us something?

Cheaper models sell?

 

[Ar¢tos]

Can you delve deeper?

Do people who go digital spend more on games and services?

Digital only ensures a higher attach rate because resale is impossible, increasing the "real" profit per game sold, in theory allowing for greater loss per unit sold.

 

[Hunnybun]

The fact an $8 per game profit increase (potential) is not the main contributing factor into WHAT a CED is sold at or its target. It is much bigger and more involved that that , thus a $100 reduction is possible for a Digital version IF all other things remain the same aside the UHD.

What other savings do you think they make from the digital console?

 

[Matsuchezz]

I really hope they sell/offer double storage PS5 versions from the get go on both versions, I really do not want to buy third party SSD to try to match or surpass the one included in performance. If they announce that I will be very pleased.

 

[Data Ghost]

I still don't understand the point in paying (presumably) 50/100 bucks less for a disk-less console only to then pay more for digital games wiping out all of that initial saving pretty quickly.

What you are then left with is a less flexible console, more expensive games, and you also can't play BluRays or UHD BluRay movies.

Am I missing something here or have I just had some sort of brain injury?

 

[vdopey]

The fact an $8 per game profit increase (potential) is not the main contributing factor into WHAT a CED is sold at or its target. It is much bigger and more involved that that , thus a $100 reduction is possible for a Digital version IF all other things remain the same aside the UHD.

what do you predict as the cost ? interested to know your thoughts.

I personally am leaning at 400 for digital and 500 for normal, maybe 400 and 550. 50 extra for the normal to make up for any shortfalls from the sales of the digital and to make digital look more attractive, but only If microsoft price xsx at 600.
I think MS are thinking around 500 as well though.

I reckon if xsx comes in at 400 sony will price both at 400 or very minor difference possibly 380 and 400.

Neither of them wants to show their hand, competition is fierce off the starting line of a new gen.

 

[Miles708]

I still don't understand the point in paying (presumably) 50/100 bucks less for a disk-less console only to then pay more for digital games wiping out all of that initial saving pretty quickly.

What you are then left with is a less flexible console, more expensive games, and you also can't play BluRays or UHD BluRay movies.

Am I missing something here or have I just had some sort of brain injury?

The same thing I was saying a page earlier.
The drive costs a few bucks so the saving is all on sony, while you end up with a physically inferior product.

 

[vdopey]

Am I missing something here or have I just had some sort of brain injury?

Nah I'm in the same boat as you, if you ever get banned from psn you lose all games as well which would be really shitty.

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

I think they should retail at the same price, but put a larger SSD in the digital-only one.

 

[yurinka]

Don't we already have an estimated BOM of $450?

$450 isn't a realistic BOM even for the discless SKU. It's gonna be way more expensive: Zen 2, RDNA, 16GB of RAM, SSD+I/O solution that is better than anything else in the market, and everything included in that DualSense is not going to be that cheap. At all.

 

[Hunnybun]

$450 isn't a realistic BOM even for the discless SKU. It's gonna be way more expensive: Zen 2, RDNA, 16GB of RAM, SSD+I/O solution that is better than anything else in the market, and everything included in that DualSense is not going to be that cheap. At all.

Based on what? That was the BOM reported by Bloomberg I think. Has it been debunked or something?

 

[yurinka]

Disc drive out, HDD size increased --> price unchanged.

Why do people assume it will be cheaper? I assume same price but comes with more storage.

Sony said that the only hardware difference between the SKUs will be that one of them doesn't have a BD drive. They both will have the same custom SSD disk, which has this specific size because it allowed them to get extra performance. In this case it wouldn't be as easy as to replace a standard HDD or SDD with another one.

Based on what? That was the BOM reported by Bloomberg I think. Has it been debunked or something?

Based on other BOM estimations an common sense having an idea of BOM from previous consoles and PC components (+ applying discount for them for buying dozens of millions of units and considering that the CPU/GPU/SSD stuff are all custom and not standard stuff that they can reduce quite fast the price by also selling them on PC).

 

[Ar¢tos]

I still don't understand the point in paying (presumably) 50/100 bucks less for a disk-less console only to then pay more for digital games wiping out all of that initial saving pretty quickly.

What you are then left with is a less flexible console, more expensive games, and you also can't play BluRays or UHD BluRay movies.

Am I missing something here or have I just had some sort of brain injury?

It depends on the consumer.
Some people buy games at launch, others like to have the physical disc, or want to watch bluray movies, for those it's not an appealing device.
But there are others, like me, that don't buy games at launch and wait for sales (30$ is the max I pay for a game, even if it takes 2 years to reach that price), don't replay games (I finish a game and delete it never to play it again) and don't watch bluray movies (I don't even own a single bluray movie), for those a cheaper digital only version is perfect.

 

[Data Ghost]

It depends on the consumer.
Some people buy games at launch, others like to have the physical disc, or want to watch bluray movies, for those it's not an appealing device.
But there are others, like me, that don't buy games at launch and wait for sales (30$ is the max I pay for a game, even if it takes 2 years to reach that price), don't replay games (I finish a game and delete it never to play it again) and don't watch bluray movies (I don't even own a single bluray movie), for those a cheaper digital only version is perfect.

But the price you pay in a digital 'sale' months/years later is probably not far off the price you can pay for the disk version closer to the launch of the game (depending on where you purchase) or off eBay??

I don't replay games either but when it comes time to sell the console, all of those boxed games sweeten the deal for the next person and help you sell quicker.

 

[Data Ghost]

.

 

[Ar¢tos]

But the price you pay in a digital 'sale' months/years later is probably not far off the price you can pay for the disk version closer to the launch of the game (depending on where you purchase)??

I don't replay games either but when it comes time to sell the console, all of those boxed games sweeten the deal for the next person and help you sell quicker.

I'm not in any rush to play a game, I don't mind waiting.
I seriously can't be bothered to go out to buy a game, then find a buyer for it when I'm done with it, and go meet the buyer to give him the game, I don't have time for that, I have a (mostly boring filled with chores) life.
I often buy a game that is in my wishlist because it was on sale very cheap and only get to launch it for the first time 2-3 weeks later.
When I was younger I had time and did that often, but that time is long gone.

 

[Data Ghost]

I'm not in any rush to play a game, I don't mind waiting.
I seriously can't be bothered to go out to buy a game, then find a buyer for it when I'm done with it, and go meet the buyer to give him the game, I don't have time for that, I have a (mostly boring filled with chores) life.
I often buy a game that is in my wishlist because it was on sale very cheap and only get to launch it for the first time 2-3 weeks later.
When I was younger I had time and did that often, but that time is long gone.

Ah ok fair enough. these diskless consoles just don't add up for me but if it works for you that's all that matters really.

 

[Thirty7ven]

I still don't understand the point in paying (presumably) 50/100 bucks less for a disk-less console only to then pay more for digital games wiping out all of that initial saving pretty quickly.

What you are then left with is a less flexible console, more expensive games, and you also can't play BluRays or UHD BluRay movies.

Am I missing something here or have I just had some sort of brain injury?

With a little patience you won’t be paying over 30$ for a game ever again. Most of the games I buy are 20$/30$.

I have 0 interest in selling my games because I like to keep them.

 

[IntentionalPun]

Some people are really missing one of the HUGE value propositions of digital games.

The fact you essentially get 2 copies using the "home console" trick.

That's a huge deal for couples, families, or anyone with multiple people in their household who want to play the same games. And people even do this with people they trust who they don't live with. Just need to download the game on your "home console" and then let the second person log in to that console and they can play the game.

With a disk based game that's not possible due to the disk DRM.

 

[Miles708]

I'm not in any rush to play a game, I don't mind waiting.
I seriously can't be bothered to go out to buy a game, then find a buyer for it when I'm done with it, and go meet the buyer to give him the game, I don't have time for that, I have a (mostly boring filled with chores) life.
I often buy a game that is in my wishlist because it was on sale very cheap and only get to launch it for the first time 2-3 weeks later.
When I was younger I had time and did that often, but that time is long gone.

That's fair, but since you're not in a rush, there's also no reason to purchase the console around launch, meaning that the (supposed) price difference could become smaller in time. and still end up paying the same with a complete machine.

The disk drive looks ugly tough, I wonder if they also did it on purpose.

Some people are really missing one of the HUGE value propositions of digital games.

The fact you essentially get 2 copies using the "home console" trick.

That's a huge deal for couples, families, or anyone with multiple people in their household who want to play the same games. And people even do this with people they trust who they don't live with. Just need to download the game on your "home console" and then let the second person log in to that console and they can play the game.

With a disk based game that's not possible due to the disk DRM.

Disk DRM? What do you mean?

 

[Self High Five]

Based on other BOM estimations an common sense having an idea of BOM from previous consoles and PC components (+ applying discount for them for buying dozens of millions of units and considering that the CPU/GPU/SSD stuff are all custom and not standard stuff that they can reduce quite fast the price by also selling them on PC).

"Common sense" is literally based on nothing since no one has any idea the R&D costs nor bulk deals Sony or MS has with manufactures. The idea of 8 GB GDDR5 in a console launching in 2013 was widely scoffed at due to arm chair BOM estimates as well.

Bloomberg is the closest and most reputable source we have so far.

 

[Ar¢tos]

That's fair, but since you're not in a rush, there's also no reason to purchase the console around launch, meaning that the (supposed) price difference could become smaller in time. and still end up paying the same with a complete machine.

The disk drive looks ugly tough, I wonder if they also did it on purpose.



Disk DRM? What do you mean?

I still like tech. Obviously when I buy at launch I have to buy 1 or 2 launch games, after that I go back to waiting for sales on crossgen games.
My issue is that I don't consider games to be worth 60$, no matter how "big" they are, even more now when they release incomplete and buggy. It's not than I can't afford them.
Buying at launch is paying more to beta test and having to deal with the frustrations of bugs, crashes, imbalanced content, missing content, etc.
I have a better experience playing later for 30$ than those that paid 60$ at launch.