Support NeoGAF

[tusharngf]

If they can get double the performance for 600 dollars it will be a game changer. I say better get a good PRO console this time and let people enjoy cinematic games at 60fps.

 

[clarky]

Because Pro wasn’t available so you can’t really count previous sales. Once it was released, it got about a quarter of all new PS4 sales.

So basically it was new users enticed by a bit more powerful system and enthusiasts looking to upgrade for better graphics.

Also fans of airplane jet engines probably jumped in because that’s what my Pro sounded like.

Be good to see the actual amount of new Playstation 4 owners in that figure but i guess we'll never know.

As to the PS5 Pro, the gen is already a lock but they will mop up if they have some sort of deal with Rockstar for an upgraded GTA6 around (GTA's) launch. That i could understand.

 

[Crayon]

I'm not upgrading my gpu till I see what this thing is about. If I want better graphics and I have $500 I should be looking at it, right? It's not a complicated strategy.

 

[BennyBlanco]

Makes more sense than PsVR2

 

[DaleinCalgary]

Sure why not.

Now release some specs!

 

[dEvAnGeL]

if 80% of the people that bought ps4 PRO, sold their OG console, that is 11+ million second hand consoles in the market that now are into Sony ecosystem. Buying subs, digital games and such. Remember. The real money maker is the software, not the hardware. And it keeps your hardcore base engaged while a new numerical console is in the works.

 

[reinking]

I'm guessing if Sony considered 14.3 million to be a failure then they wouldn't bother with PS5 Pro. I know I'll be there day one for the Pro. @HeisenbergFX4 is saving me a place in line.

I was prepared to sit it out. Then one PS5 left to my house and I am in need of another. I know it sounds braggy, but we were using one as a PSVR2 machine and one in another room as just a console. I did not realize what a convenience that is until I was back down to one PS5. I'm getting my fingers and keyboard back in shape for F5 season.

 

[Guerilla Munch]

That's almost $6 billion in hardware sales just for the Pro, no shit they're gonna do it again

 

[Mibu no ookami]

I would say yes to all 3 questions. It seems obvious that the PS4 Pro was profitable for Sony. And it had side benefits like training third party studios in making good decisions like unlocked framerates, better presets that allow for the games to be better on the PS5 among others benefits. A PS5 Pro would have the same benefits.
It is worth it for the enthusiast market? Once again, Sony seems to have seen a good return on investment on this. We have some anecdotal evidence like if I remember right the PS4 Pro never getting a price cut in countries like South Korea, and enough games even now like RE 4 Remake are far better on PS4 Pro than on the PS4. Here Sony could have even better results if Xbox don't have a Pro of their own. Having a halo product will pay for itself in PR and allow Playstation partners to use it to their advantage. We talked a lot about GTA 6, but many games would like to use the Pro to have their games shown in the best light possible.
As for the consumer, 14 millions think so for the PS4 Pro. How many will be convinced for the PS5 Pro? This time, there is another benefit that the PS4 did not have: the Series S. Any game that can work on the S will naturally be a lot better on the PS5 Pro. What I mean by that is that we already know that Sony will make their studios use the Pro and make it clear why you should buy one if you are interested in their exclusives. We also know that most third party studios will mostly have a token effort and not push it to the max. But this time the S force them to push games harder to "fit" in the S. So any preset and choice that is worse in the S, like draw distance, AA or shadow quality, can be made at a highter level on the PS5 Pro. Take a game like Fortnite. Whatever limitations that it got on the PS5 will naturally be lifted, and the game will have better internal resolution and FPS by default. But the devs may also put better shadows if they see that it is possible with no problem. Games are more scalable than before, so it will be easier to tap in the PS5 Pro power. It will be the same for the next Xbox, but at some point going from 4 TF to what? 20 TF? 30 TF? 40 TF with dual compute? will make the console naturally underutilised IMHO. But this is another discussion.

The pandemic absolutely screwed up any potential long life cycle plans for PS4.

With PS5 Digital launching for 400, you'd think the PS4 Pro would have dropped to 300 and the PS4 dropping to 200-250. The number of units they probably would have sold at these prices would not have been insignificant.

 

[Danny Dudekisser]

The number isn't huge, but I'd bet the people buying the Pro are generally enthusiasts that are spending a lot more on games and accessories than your average consumer.

 

[S0ULZB0URNE]

Yes

 

[Deerock71]

After the PS4 Pro launched, Sony sold about 66.2m PS4’s (Slim + Pro), that equals to about 21% consisting of Pro Systems.

I’d say that the strategy is decent.

 

[damidu]

The number isn't huge, but I'd bet the people buying the Pro are generally enthusiasts that are spending a lot more on games and accessories than your average consumer.

yeah was about to post exactly this. its a userbase you'd want to target on later half of the gen as pc-console gap widens

 

[Killjoy-NL]

If Sony is doing it I'm sure they are fine with it.

Yes, if.

 

[bender]

I'd be curious to see the tie ratio of PS4Pro to PSVR.

 

[Daneel Elijah]

The pandemic absolutely screwed up any potential long life cycle plans for PS4.

With PS5 Digital launching for 400, you'd think the PS4 Pro would have dropped to 300 and the PS4 dropping to 200-250. The number of units they probably would have sold at these prices would not have been insignificant.

I think that if they really wanted to push the PS4 as hard as possible they would have made a PS4 super slim at 7nm. I understand that it was probably not viable or a lot less profitable that the PS3 super slim was. But I think that they had to at least looked at the possibility. As you have said, the pandemic forced Sony to kill the the PS4 faster.

 

[MasterCornholio]

Yes, if.

It's just a waiting game now. Sooner or later the truth will come out. In the meantime we have some great games to look forward to.

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

No, it only helped to generate so much negativity when PS5 launched and the graphical jump has been minimal. If they would have gone directly from the base PS4 to actual PS5 things would have been a lot more exciting.

You're saying the 100+ million PS4 owners were actually playing at PS4 Pro settings despite not having bought one? Where's that setting at in the system UI? I need to find it.

Anyway, yes. Like many others have been saying, this validates the PS5 Pro's existence, to the dismay of people like Paul Tassi and publications like Forbes. At the very least it's an interim system that can provide great training for future technologies, for the devs who want to test them out, and we know the system tools will make that easy enough if they wish to do so. It also justifies itself in providing relatively "free" performance boosts for games that aren't bottlenecked by the CPU-bottlenecked.

AFAIK, every PS4 Pro sold was sold at a profit, likely with higher profit margins than the base PS4 systems. That combined with their limited volume production (respective of the base system) would have made it make sense from a money POV alone. A Pro also helps with other things like better VR fidelity, and retaining more core enthusiasts in the console side of the ecosystem who might be getting tempted at going with a more powerful PC rig.

Honestly at this point, I'm starting to think the only ones vehemently against the idea of a PS5 Pro are Xbox diehards (including PCMR who are Xbox-adjacent) jealous that PlayStation might be getting a Pro model this year while Xbox's entry is MIA in that department. There are few if any other legitimate reasons to be against the idea of one, even if you personally aren't interested in upgrading to a Pro.

I get what your saying but an upgrading customer from PS5 to Pro is worth a hell of a lot less than a new customer to Sony's current eco system.

Like how many PS5 users would abandon it entirely mid gen if the Pro didn't exist? No many imo. Same with how many people are hanging on for a pro model that don't yet own a PS5? Again not many imo.

12% ish of the user base were PS4 Pro's. Unless MS are doing something similar, I don' see why they are bothering.

Actually, this isn't true. At least, not the way it's usually thought to be. The type of person who's upgrading from a base PS5 to the Pro is likely already a core enthusiast customer who spends a lot in the PS ecosystem as-is. On a per-customer basis, they are by far the most valuable to Sony (or equivalent in the case of Nintendo, or even Microsoft), and motivating them to spend more in the ecosystem (through an upgraded system that encourages yet further spending on software, services etc.) would be a top priority.

Better to give those types of customers a reason to do most of their spending on PS Store, the console etc. vs. entertain switching over to PC if they're starting to get that inkling. Not to mention the natural benefits of things like higher-fidelity VR, even better image quality for PS Portal local streaming, so on and so forth. New customers in the ecosystem are valuable, too, don't misunderstand me. However, they are likely going to be lower-core/casual/mainstream types who will have lower ARPU than the higher-end hardcore/core enthusiast.

Tho overall, that is offset by there being many more casual and mainstream customers in any given healthy console ecosystem. That said, casual & mainstream types would be targeted by the base PS5, not the PS5 Pro. And hooking them in would come through things like further price cuts as hardware production gets cheaper over time.

 

[Jesb]

It’s a better option than the Xbox route of releasing two systems with one much worse. Clearly it’s profitable for Sony. They are doing it again.

 

[clarky]

You're saying the 100+ million PS4 owners were actually playing at PS4 Pro settings despite not having bought one? Where's that setting at in the system UI? I need to find it.

Anyway, yes. Like many others have been saying, this validates the PS5 Pro's existence, to the dismay of people like Paul Tassi and publications like Forbes. At the very least it's an interim system that can provide great training for future technologies, for the devs who want to test them out, and we know the system tools will make that easy enough if they wish to do so. It also justifies itself in providing relatively "free" performance boosts for games that aren't bottlenecked by the CPU-bottlenecked.

AFAIK, every PS4 Pro sold was sold at a profit, likely with higher profit margins than the base PS4 systems. That combined with their limited volume production (respective of the base system) would have made it make sense from a money POV alone. A Pro also helps with other things like better VR fidelity, and retaining more core enthusiasts in the console side of the ecosystem who might be getting tempted at going with a more powerful PC rig.

Honestly at this point, I'm starting to think the only ones vehemently against the idea of a PS5 Pro are Xbox diehards (including PCMR who are Xbox-adjacent) jealous that PlayStation might be getting a Pro model this year while Xbox's entry is MIA in that department. There are few if any other legitimate reasons to be against the idea of one, even if you personally aren't interested in upgrading to a Pro.



Actually, this isn't true. At least, not the way it's usually thought to be. The type of person who's upgrading from a base PS5 to the Pro is likely already a core enthusiast customer who spends a lot in the PS ecosystem as-is. On a per-customer basis, they are by far the most valuable to Sony (or equivalent in the case of Nintendo, or even Microsoft), and motivating them to spend more in the ecosystem (through an upgraded system that encourages yet further spending on software, services etc.) would be a top priority.

Better to give those types of customers a reason to do most of their spending on PS Store, the console etc. vs. entertain switching over to PC if they're starting to get that inkling. Not to mention the natural benefits of things like higher-fidelity VR, even better image quality for PS Portal local streaming, so on and so forth. New customers in the ecosystem are valuable, too, don't misunderstand me. However, they are likely going to be lower-core/casual/mainstream types who will have lower ARPU than the higher-end hardcore/core enthusiast.

Tho overall, that is offset by there being many more casual and mainstream customers in any given healthy console ecosystem. That said, casual & mainstream types would be targeted by the base PS5, not the PS5 Pro. And hooking them in would come through things like further price cuts as hardware production gets cheaper over time.

Source?

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

Source?

It's not like I have a bunch of bookmarks easily sorted to pull up, but I also don't think that's a controversial opinion. Honestly, it's rather common sense.

In any ecosystem, you're going to have a niche of people who are small in install base count relative the majority, but are your "big spenders" and power users. They are going to have the highest ARPU by far and the biggest MAU within that install base, even if they make up the smallest percentage of buyers.

Therefore their spending power is much higher ratio-wise compared to their own install base size. We see this regularly in industries like the casino: the "whales" who are the biggest spenders (and even here, there are tiers) despite being smaller base-wise than the majority of gamblers who only spend moderate or small amounts of money. You get this in any other type of industry, entertainment or otherwise, so I don't feel it's something that needs a bunch of hard data to back it up.

Tho I'm sure the data exists, and it's probably been conveyed in some of Sony's own data here and there. I just don't have the time to go source it all in an instant. Still tho, I feel it's a common-sense conclusion and we see it reflected in other markets like casino/gambling, or the film theater industry (particularly when it was healthier), so on and so forth.

EDIT: Here's a quick result I fetched on the "hardcore/core enthusiast highest ARPU spenders" concept.

 

[damidu]

Honestly at this point, I'm starting to think the only ones vehemently against the idea of a PS5 Pro are Xbox diehards (including PCMR who are Xbox-adjacent) jealous that PlayStation might be getting a Pro model this year while Xbox's entry is MIA in that department.

oh most of it is a full-on cope show, for sure
you can even see it in their psychological fluctuations, saying no need for pro for a full year then suddenly daydreaming for new gen in 2025 etc.

 

[clarky]

It's not like I have a bunch of bookmarks easily sorted to pull up, but I also don't think that's a controversial opinion. Honestly, it's rather common sense.

In any ecosystem, you're going to have a niche of people who are small in install base count relative the majority, but are your "big spenders" and power users. They are going to have the highest ARPU by far and the biggest MAU within that install base, even if they make up the smallest percentage of buyers.

Therefore their spending power is much higher ratio-wise compared to their own install base size. We see this regularly in industries like the casino: the "whales" who are the biggest spenders (and even here, there are tiers) despite being smaller base-wise than the majority of gamblers who only spend moderate or small amounts of money. You get this in any other type of industry, entertainment or otherwise, so I don't feel it's something that needs a bunch of hard data to back it up.

Tho I'm sure the data exists, and it's probably been conveyed in some of Sony's own data here and there. I just don't have the time to go source it all in an instant. Still tho, I feel it's a common-sense conclusion and we see it reflected in other markets like casino/gambling, or the film theater industry (particularly when it was healthier), so on and so forth.

EDIT: Here's a quick result I fetched on the "hardcore/core enthusiast highest ARPU spenders" concept.

Its obvious that us lot spend more cash, of course. That bits common sense. I added at least ten full price games to my back log these last few months and ive hardly touched any of them yet for example

Is there any evidence that we spend more or are more likely to stick around if they release a Pro? i'll buy the Sony titles that interest me on release regardless.

Obviously Sony thinks theres some value in it but i think they would think twice in hindsight if they could see the dominating position they are in now, and knowing Xbox don't a have a pro up their sleave. Too late to reverse course even 12 months ago i think.


Thinking about it did any other gen suffer lack of sales towards the end of the generation? On the contrary some of the biggest sellers happen toward the end of each cycle regardless of the existence of pro consoles.

Mass migration to PC in favour of the PS3? Never happened.

I just don't see any evidence for what your saying. Not saying your wrong of course and do i see where you are coming from.

 

[Killer8]

Depends on the R&D costs. PS4 Pro was important to have as an option as 4K TV entered the mainstream. It was also a bulwark against the Xbox One X which would release the following year. It could have been a different final three years of the generation if the One X was coming out with games which could blow away the base PS4, visually. It's a situation that Microsoft themselves might find themselves in if "Xbox Series X is the pro model" and Sony release the rumored PS5 Pro this year.

 

[clarky]

Depends on the R&D costs. PS4 Pro was important to have as an option as 4K TV entered the mainstream. It was also a bulwark against the Xbox One X which would release the following year. It could have been a different final three years of the generation if the One X was coming out with games which could blow away the base PS4, visually. It's a situation that Microsoft themselves might find themselves in if "Xbox Series X is the pro model" and Sony release the rumored PS5 Pro this year.

Good point. It made much more sense last gen.

 

[Mobilemofo]

Depends on what the margins are I'd expect. Having sold 14.3 million amongst the ps4s overall total, I'd say it's justified if they are turning a profit

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

Its obvious that us lot spend more cash, of course. That bits common sense. I added at least ten full price games to my back log these last few months and ive hardly touched any of them yet for example

Is there any evidence that we spend more or are more likely to stick around if they release a Pro? i'll buy the Sony titles that interest me on release regardless.

Obviously Sony thinks theres some value in it but i think they would think twice in hindsight if they could see the dominating position they are in now, and knowing Xbox don't a have a pro up their sleave. Too late to reverse course even 12 months ago i think.


Thinking about it did any other gen suffer lack of sales towards the end of the generation? On the contrary some of the biggest sellers happen toward the end of each cycle regardless of the existence of pro consoles.

Mass migration to PC in favour of the PS3? Never happened.

I just don't see any evidence for what your saying. Not saying your wrong of course and do i see where you are coming from.

There actually was a lot of migration from console to PC near the end of 7th gen, but a lot of that was Xbox 360 gamers. A good deal of whom also went and got PS3s late in that console's life because it was serving their gaming tastes better than the exclusives for 360 after the Kinect released.

I think it's just a natural assumption that, if you release an upgraded console hardware system and someone buys it, they are going to feel inclined to get their money's worth out of it. Which means they're going to put some priority in supporting it with software purchases and likely subscriptions as well. Again, I feel like this is one of those things that most would assume to be true.

Also FWIW, I don't feel Sony does nor should they hinge plans for a PS5 Pro around whether or not Xbox has a Pro model in the works. Xbox isn't PlayStation's only competitor in an absolute sense: it has to compete with Nintendo, mobile and yes even PC (particularly things like Steam). Any of those alternatives that attract a customer means potentially one less PlayStation customer, or at least a customer spending less on PlayStation as they're spreading their spending power out onto other platforms and ecosystems.

Besides, there are various people in the PS ecosystem who seemingly want a PS5 Pro regardless of whatever Microsoft are doing, just like how there were those who wanted a PSVR2 or a PS Portal. Should Sony not serve their interests just because a direct competitor doesn't care to do so?

 

[Mibu no ookami]

I think that if they really wanted to push the PS4 as hard as possible they would have made a PS4 super slim at 7nm. I understand that it was probably not viable or a lot less profitable that the PS3 super slim was. But I think that they had to at least looked at the possibility. As you have said, the pandemic forced Sony to kill the the PS4 faster.

Parents are super price-conscious. At 200 dollars, or even less with a super slim, Sony really could have hit crazy numbers with the PS4. It largely died at 300 dollars, which is kind of unheard of. It maintained that price for over 3 years when the pandemic first hit.

I think we can't rule anything out and hopefully one day we'll hear about it in a book or something.

It's clear from their software strategy that they fully anticipated supporting the PS4 through much of 2023. Hell, we may have even seen a handheld PS4 at that rate. I do think we'll eventually see a handheld PS5.

Even without a handheld version, it could have sold 10-20 million more units on price cuts alone. That's the kind of price where people don't mind buying an extra one for another room.

It was part of the reason why I thought the new PS5 models would be more expensive. I think eventually that digital model though is going to be available for really cheap. I think 350 by the end of the year, and we're only in year 4 of a 7+ year cycle. I think we'll see a PS5 super slim and as I mentioned a PS5 handheld towards the end of the cycle.

 

[DaleinCalgary]

Parents are super price-conscious. At 200 dollars, or even less with a super slim, Sony really could have hit crazy numbers with the PS4. It largely died at 300 dollars, which is kind of unheard of. It maintained that price for over 3 years when the pandemic first hit.

Nintendo killed price cuts.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

Nintendo killed price cuts.

I don't think you're entirely wrong. I think Nintendo has shown that people will pay higher prices which means higher margins, but that being said, price cuts still happen. It's just more a matter of how long, when, and how much.

 

[tr1p1ex]

I don't know if it needs to be done. I feel they did it last gen because of 4k tvs. Maybe Sony did it for PSVR. Maybe MSFT and Sony did it because they heard the other was doing it and/or were afraid the other was going to do it.


I was for it last gen. But now...feel like it wasn't that big of a hit. And I think one goes console for the 1 model. For the even playing field. And retailers like fewer skus. People like to know this is the one sku to get. Developers like fewer skus. One console gives the console maker a longer runway to profit off the hardware ...

And developers always squeezed more out of the old hardware as time went on. Which helped make up for the hardware's age. Look at what Nintendo squeezed out of the 2017 handheld hardware.. TotK. Pro model probably makes developers a bit lazier. the mentality becomes well the customer can buy the faster hardware if they want the game to run better.

Plus...what's the cost of going pc nowadays? GPU pricing went up a lot. How many are really going pc if they don't release a Pro model? I don't think many. And I know I always went where the games were.

releasing a Pro model makes the next-gen launch a bit less exciting too. Dampens the fun.

last...feel like the leap in graphics is less and less mind blowing as it is so little to no need for a mid-cycle hardware upgrade.

 

[MikeM]

I didn’t buy a Ps4 Pro as I still had a 1080p TV back then. With what I have now, day 1 for PS5 Pro. Parking Elden Ring and holding off on GT7 until I get one in my hands.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

I don't know if it needs to be done. I feel they did it last gen because of 4k tvs. Maybe Sony did it for PSVR. Maybe MSFT and Sony did it because they heard the other was doing it and/or were afraid the other was going to do it.


I was for it last gen. But now...feel like it wasn't that big of a hit. And I think one goes console for the 1 model. For the even playing field. And retailers like fewer skus. People like to know this is the one sku to get. Developers like fewer skus. One console gives the console maker a longer runway to profit off the hardware ...

And developers always squeezed more out of the old hardware as time went on. Which helped make up for the hardware's age. Look at what Nintendo squeezed out of the 2017 handheld hardware.. TotK. Pro model probably makes developers a bit lazier. the mentality becomes well the customer can buy the faster hardware if they want the game to run better.

Plus...what's the cost of going pc nowadays? GPU pricing went up a lot. How many are really going pc if they don't release a Pro model? I don't think many.

releasing a Pro model makes the next -gen launch a bit less exciting too. Dampens the fun of a new launch.

last...feel like the leap in graphics is less and less mind blowing as it is so little to no need for a mid-cycle hardware upgrade.

People need to stop conflating the advent of 4K with pro machines. There are still reasons to have pro machines, especially when you consider we're choosing from fidelity and performance on most games.

I think once the pro machines come out, the base games should move to 30 fps as a standard and the pros should deliver 60 fps.

With the number of core gamers the number of early adopters in the console market has never been higher, so the idea that it dampens the fun of a new launch seems misplaced.

We're going to have diminishing returns on graphics. It's incumbent upon manufacturers to look for otherwise to set new consoles apart like sony did with the SSD and haptic controls. The level up in VR gaming.

There are a lot of areas where the PS6 can obviously improve in ways the PS5 Pro likely won't.

PCIe6 SSD
Hardware focused raytracing
AI upscaling/machine learning
PSVR3 - Wireless VR

And it'll likely lean more on cloud than any other console before it and hopefully have PS Link integration.

 

[JayDucker]

GTA 6 will look/play best on PS5 Pro at launch, I don't think the PS4 Pro had that kind of upgrade/ new purchase incentive at any time in it's life cycle. I think sales will be easily more than the last Pro.

Not that there was anything wrong with the numbers the first time round.

 

[tr1p1ex]

People need to stop conflating the advent of 4K with pro machines. There are still reasons to have pro machines, especially when you consider we're choosing from fidelity and performance on most games.

I think once the pro machines come out, the base games should move to 30 fps as a standard and the pros should deliver 60 fps.

With the number of core gamers the number of early adopters in the console market has never been higher, so the idea that it dampens the fun of a new launch seems misplaced.

We're going to have diminishing returns on graphics. It's incumbent upon manufacturers to look for otherwise to set new consoles apart like sony did with the SSD and haptic controls. The level up in VR gaming.

conflating last gen's Pro machines with 4k (which seemingly is the big reason they came out) is not the same as saying there aren't other uses for the power. I am a pcgamer. I know what extra power does for games. .

I think it does dampen the fun of a next gen launch because of the fact the jump to a new generation is measurably less from a ~3 yr old machine compared to a ~7 yr old machine.

Anyway listed about 10 reasons why Pro machine doesn't need to exist. I get anyone who wants one. I mean who is going to argue with someone who personally wants to spend $600 or whatever on a faster version of their ~3yr old console. I get it. I just am looking at it more philosophically and from a wider outside of myself and business market point of view.

 

[tr1p1ex]

GTA 6 will look/play best on PS5 Pro at launch, I don't think the PS4 Pro had that kind of upgrade/ new purchase incentive at any time in it's life cycle. I think sales will be easily more than the last Pro.

good point. and given it will probably be buggy and not the best running...even more incentive to get a PS5 Pro. I can see that actually being pre-planned between TTWO, Rockstar and Sony.

Expensive for the customer tho.

 

[Yoboman]

So PS4 Pro 14.3 million in about 4 years. Approx 3.6 million per year

Xbox Series X 12.5 million in 3 years (~25 million Series consoles at 50% ratio for Series X)
Approx 4.2 million per year

PS4 Pro not far off a main console isn't bad

 

[Mr.Phoenix]

C'mon. Many OG PS5 owners 'upgraded' to a slim. It is not 14 million new customers unless they all sold their OG PS4s and the people who bought them would not have bought new ones if there were no used ones. And the people who bought the used ones would need to be buying new games and subbing to PS+ for this strategy to be meaningful.

Let's do a madness and assume that all 14M sales were of people upgrading. What do you think they did with the older consoles? You think all 14M of them held onto their PS4 as a backup console?

Point is, it doesn't matter. The thing sold 14M+ units, be that people upgrading, or first-time buyers, or people upgrading and then making first-time buyers of the people they sell their older console to as a used console, that's still a net positive increase in revenue generated for the userbase.

All that aside, I don't understand people sometimes... the bolded part is the most short-sighted thing I have read in a minute. Be it a PS4 or a PS4pro, be it a used console or not, it adds to the overall user base. The question is would they have sold an additional 14M if the PS4 Pro never existed?

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

Parents are super price-conscious. At 200 dollars, or even less with a super slim, Sony really could have hit crazy numbers with the PS4. It largely died at 300 dollars, which is kind of unheard of. It maintained that price for over 3 years when the pandemic first hit.

I think we can't rule anything out and hopefully one day we'll hear about it in a book or something.

It's clear from their software strategy that they fully anticipated supporting the PS4 through much of 2023. Hell, we may have even seen a handheld PS4 at that rate. I do think we'll eventually see a handheld PS5.

Even without a handheld version, it could have sold 10-20 million more units on price cuts alone. That's the kind of price where people don't mind buying an extra one for another room.

It was part of the reason why I thought the new PS5 models would be more expensive. I think eventually that digital model though is going to be available for really cheap. I think 350 by the end of the year, and we're only in year 4 of a 7+ year cycle. I think we'll see a PS5 super slim and as I mentioned a PS5 handheld towards the end of the cycle.

Honestly if anything, it's showing that price-consciousness is only a factor if the value perception isn't perceived to be there. A $299 PS4 in 2021 just wasn't a good value prop for most people looking to buy a console in 2021, compared to a PS5 Digital at $399, or a PS5 Disc at $499. But in the case of PS4 I don't know if it really matters because PS4 systems weren't even in great supply post-2020.

Now if PS4 were readily available during the pandemic, I'd say it would have stolen a good amount of thunder from the Series S, because a lot of people who bought the Series S during that period would have likely gotten a PS4 instead if it were more readily available, considering its role as a cross-gen box and PS4 still getting all of those same cross-gen 3P games (and 1P games). In a sense I think even the Series X would have had lower demand if PS4 were more readily available, tho maybe not by much.

The only systems that for sure would have been seen as clear-and-away better value props than a $299 PS4 during the pandemic, provided supply were sufficient in all cases, would've been the PS5 Digital, PS Disc, and Nintendo Switch. And FWIW, the Switch was definitely in supply, while both PS5s were in pretty good supply in general (heavily under-supplied compared to demand, tho) relative new PS4s during that period, too.

If anything it really does show in ways how PS5 and even PS4 under-supply really benefited Xbox Series sales during the pandemic period.

good point. and given it will probably be buggy and not the best running...even more incentive to get a PS5 Pro. I can see that actually being pre-planned between TTWO, Rockstar and Sony.

Expensive for the customer tho.

You know what I'm starting to think GTA6 is a Q1 2025 release. Otherwise I don't see too much a reason to launch PS5 Pro in late 2024. There has to be some synergy there with PS5 Pro's launch coming at or at least close to GTA6s', and GTA6 is the kind of game that doesn't need to care about what time of year it releases to sell. It's gonna break records during any time of the year it comes out.

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

for the always elusive second secret showcase

 

[Tiago Rodrigues]

If Sony is doing it again for the ps5 after the ps4 pro sold those units…then they know that strategy works. I don’t see what else there is to be said

 

[Ozzie666]

PS4 PRO had 4K TV and HDR push behind it, it wasn't just about better performance. What's the push this time? The base for development will still be PS5. I really hate this push to consoles becoming PC or Mobile increases.

Sony doesn't need the pro at all and it diminshes the leap with the next console. I still feel the PS4 PRO made the PS5 and Series X, less impressive.

I'll still buy it.

 

[bender]

If Sony is doing it again for the ps4 after the ps4 pro sold those units…then they know that strategy works. I don’t see what else there is to be said

Pretty much. If we do get a PS5 Pro, it will definitely alter my habits. I'll skip it and PS6 base and just wait for PS6 Pro.

 

[Iced Arcade]

Could have a back hand negative effect on future gens with customers going "im not jumping at a console launch... going to wait for the inevitable pro" that and previous gen consoles still getting most games anyway so why not wait. I'll probably do this next Gen to be honest.

That being said, obviously there is a market for it so why not reap while you can

 

[Gameplay Gods Bless]

Source: https://www.installbaseforum.com/fo...party-games-have-been-leaked.2215/post-216754

Data as of Jan 2020
Details Disc Retail, Bundled, and Digital

Disc and Bundled-
SIEA: 11th Jan 2020
SIEE: 12th Jan 2020
SIEJA: 12th Jan 2020

Digital: 19th Jan 2020

PS4: 105.3 million (including 14.3 million PS4 Pro) as of 19th Jan 2020
PSVR: 5.1 million as of 19th Jan 2020

PS4 released in 2013
PS4 sales were at 50 million Dec 2016 (https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ga...s-sold-as-of-december-6-2016-sony-1635203/amp)

PS4 Pro launched in 2016.
By 2020, there were combined sales of both platforms totalling 110 million (https://hypebeast.com/2020/5/sony-playstation-4-110-million-sales-game-boy-color-consoles)

In 2020
Based on the stats above, The lifetime ratio overall for PS4: Pro was 15:2 (~7 to 1)
Based on the stats above the delta ratio would be 30:7 (~4 to 1)

PS4 was most profitable console ever up to 2021 as well.


Would you interpret this as worthy of the R&D? Is it worth pursuing for the enthusiast market? Does it provide value for the consumer?

3060 drastically outsold the 3090. That doesn't mean the 3090 didn't offer value to Nvidia by providing A) a halo product B) winning the power/performance crown vs AMD C) allowing for product segmentation so consumers who can afford better than a 3060 have an actual option they can purchase.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

Honestly if anything, it's showing that price-consciousness is only a factor if the value perception isn't perceived to be there. A $299 PS4 in 2021 just wasn't a good value prop for most people looking to buy a console in 2021, compared to a PS5 Digital at $399, or a PS5 Disc at $499. But in the case of PS4 I don't know if it really matters because PS4 systems weren't even in great supply post-2020.

Now if PS4 were readily available during the pandemic, I'd say it would have stolen a good amount of thunder from the Series S, because a lot of people who bought the Series S during that period would have likely gotten a PS4 instead if it were more readily available, considering its role as a cross-gen box and PS4 still getting all of those same cross-gen 3P games (and 1P games). In a sense I think even the Series X would have had lower demand if PS4 were more readily available, tho maybe not by much.

The only systems that for sure would have been seen as clear-and-away better value props than a $299 PS4 during the pandemic, provided supply were sufficient in all cases, would've been the PS5 Digital, PS Disc, and Nintendo Switch. And FWIW, the Switch was definitely in supply, while both PS5s were in pretty good supply in general (heavily under-supplied compared to demand, tho) relative new PS4s during that period, too.

If anything it really does show in ways how PS5 and even PS4 under-supply really benefited Xbox Series sales during the pandemic period.

Not sure that is the whole story. A 299 PS4 wasn't a good value proposition, but it shouldn't have been 300. If not for supply chain issues and costs, you probably see a PS4 for as cheap as 200 dollars. That changes the equation entirely, especially as it was still getting new games like God of War, GT7, and Horizon.

A reason why the PS4 wasn't readily available was because it didn't make sense for them to prioritize producing PS4s, when you want to get as many PS5s out there as possible and the cost to do so was high.

I agree though that the under-supply really helped the XBS.

 

[Jesb]

no sense in buying a PS5 now if you held out this long. I’ll be holding out until this comes out. I imagine the base PS5 won’t be significantly cheaper. Maybe $100 or less cheaper. Spider-Man bundle here goes for $650. I see this going for the same amount or no more than $700.

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

Could have a back hand negative effect on future gens with customers going "im not jumping at a console launch... going to wait for the inevitable pro" that and previous gen consoles still getting most games anyway so why not wait. I'll probably do this next Gen to be honest.

That being said, obviously there is a market for it so why not reap while you can

Maybe, but I kind of doubt that being the case. The people who tend to buy these Pro consoles are hardcore and core enthusiasts, who are also usually early adopters. Meaning, they are very likely still going to buy the base systems instead of waiting 3-4 years into the gen to finally "jump in".

 

[playsaves3]

People need to stop conflating the advent of 4K with pro machines. There are still reasons to have pro machines, especially when you consider we're choosing from fidelity and performance on most games.

I think once the pro machines come out, the base games should move to 30 fps as a standard and the pros should deliver 60 fps.

With the number of core gamers the number of early adopters in the console market has never been higher, so the idea that it dampens the fun of a new launch seems misplaced.

We're going to have diminishing returns on graphics. It's incumbent upon manufacturers to look for otherwise to set new consoles apart like sony did with the SSD and haptic controls. The level up in VR gaming.

There are a lot of areas where the PS6 can obviously improve in ways the PS5 Pro likely won't.

PCIe6 SSD
Hardware focused raytracing
AI upscaling/machine learning
PSVR3 - Wireless VR

And it'll likely lean more on cloud than any other console before it and hopefully have PS Link integration.

That’s underselling the ps6 massively I expect chiplets maybe 4 chiplets each can render 1800p-4k individually. Completely advanced ai algorithms to power games and make more realistic worlds maybe they can incorporate a bit of the new quantum computing in the ps6 a bit via having different states the machine runs in parallel and I’m only scratching the surface

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

That’s underselling the ps6 massively I expect chiplets maybe 4 chiplets each can render 1800p-4k individually. Completely advanced ai algorithms to power games and make more realistic worlds maybe they can incorporate a bit of the new quantum computing in the ps6 a bit via having different states the machine runs in parallel and I’m only scratching the surface

There 100% won't be quantum computing or anything like graphene in PS6, just way too soon. However I am definitely expecting a chiplet-based APU design, for at least the GPU if not also the CPU.