Playstation's been doing this crap since 2019 and they're almost as successful as PS2 and equal to PS4 so what's the issue here?
Sony plans include PC Launcher, Cross-Buy, Cross-Save/Progression with PC, PS Plus on Fire Stick, Roku and Smart TVs
- Thread starter Etifilio
- Start date
hi, resident PC builder here
the RX 6800xt, a great value AMD card, can be found for 400 bucks on ebay.
The 5090 will be 1800 or something more ridiculous than that yeah.
The 5090 and all its lower tier lackeys will also massively drop the price of the 40 series.
(that 800 dollar 4070 which is actually 500 dollars, will become 350 at the very least.)
Which will drop the price of the 30 series.
(A 3080 ti which is currently 420 dollars will probably drop even further to 300)
Which will drop the price of the AMD equivalents as well.
This is also including intel's hat in the ring with Battlemage being on the way very soon
Please stop always assuming the PC is hyper expensive. We wouldn't have 140+ million MAU on steam if you needed to make 6 figures to step in.
A lot of these users are playing on PS4 quality PCs... How many million MAU on PS5 or higher quality assets?
you mean like how 50% of the PS userbase is still on PS4?
Also, please stop with the "ps4 quality PC" rhetoric. The most popular card on the Steam Survey is the RTX 3060, which is around equivalent to a PS5's GPU with Nvidia's featureset.
Most of the cards following up are plenty capable too
Xbox is the evidence.
It's already happened. What do you think was happening near the end of the 360/PS3 generation? Why do you think the PS4 Pro was made (among other reasons)? And again, what have you literally seen happen with Xbox over the past 10 years?
It's only beneficial if the number of new net customers is enough to collectively replace the 2-3 million who phase out from buying PlayStation hardware, most SIE peripherals and most 3P games through PlayStation to shift towards PC, Steam, and using a PS Launcher mainly for PS+ and 1P SIE games.
The chances a single net new customer coming in through this pathway of a PS Launcher, will spend enough to replace a single of those 2-3 million high-ARPU hardcore/core enthusiasts who just naturally reduce their spend on PlayStation specifically, is very low. So, Sony'd have to count on just netting multiples of those types for every one high-ARPU hardcore/core enthusiast who "scales down".
Yes but mainly from 1P games. The PS PC Launcher would have to do a hell of a lot to convince PC gamers, to buy 3P games there instead of some place like Steam. Heck, it'd have to do a lot to convince many to buy SIE's own games on the Launcher vs. Steam, considering a PS Launcher on PC doesn't mean SIE will stop bringing their games to Steam.
At most it'd just mean the Launcher gets them first, and then they go to Steam maybe a year or so later. I don't think the element of FOMO will work for SIE on PC in that case to the degree it has (so far) in the console space.
If the amount of 3P games present is lacking then less of those 2-3 million will go to the PC Launcher and would just probably stick with the console, yes. But if what percentage "jumps over" isn't stricken with FOMO and already have PCs for some gaming anyhow...why would they not go with the launcher if it means (potentially) getting 1P games Day 1 there, with PSN and PS+ integrated in the experience?
They can use the Launcher for 1P games, and Steam for 3P games. It's really that simple.
I didn't say "all" console players. I estimated it'd be at most maybe 2-3 million of their high-ARPU hardcore/core enthusiasts, and that would depend on a multitude of factors. The more of those factors that manifest, the more of those 2-3 million that'd switch from a console to PC. And even that 2-3 million is not representative of the total number of high-ARPU hardcore/core enthusiasts on console. It doesn't include more casual core gamers, casuals or mainstream at all, either, which would easily outnumber hardcore/core enthusiasts in install base count.
However, the 2-3 million that'd switch bring with them amount of spending power, and a lot of that spending power would probably shift from outside of the PlayStation ecosystem and towards other ecosystems on PC. This isn't a radical concept. You remember the old measure of "software attach rates"? Well it's similar here; those 2-3 million would be the types in older gens with the highest software attach rates by far; there aren't many of them, but they do the most spending in the ecosystem. SIE losing out on a large portion (let's say 60-70%) of that spending from those 2-3 million is going to hit a bit different than losing a mainstream customer, because a single high-ARPU hardcore/core enthusiast probably spends the equivalent of 4-5 mainstream customers' worth in a console generation.
As for things that might attract once-console players to PC, again we have already seen historical precedent of why. Better peak performance potential, free online, integrated Steam features (community forums, much better refund policy, etc.), PC-exclusive games, retro emulation, full Discord usability, robust streaming capabilities, cheaper game prices, tons of mod support, tons of I/O controller options, convenience (same system as for student studies for example, or multimedia production for a freelance artist + gamer as another example), etc.
There's quite a few strong reasons there, and it's why I've been suggesting if SIE (and to a lesser extent, Microsoft) want to make their console more competitive, they should be finding ways to integrate these types of features into the console experience while still retaining the universal benefits consoles tend to enjoy vs. PC (ease of use, simple/family-friendly UI, security, upfront costs).
Right so I guess SEGA, NEC, 3DO, Atari, SNK etc. never existed and Xbox never existed? Or PS3 and PS Vita never existed? Or Wii U or GameCube? Got it o.0.
So why are you disagreeing with me on this? I've only been saying there is some lateral transfer. Not flat-out, full-on transfer of audiences.
I've acknowledged this, hence why I also said that it's very possible SIE could bring in enough new people (be they new from Xbox, new from Nintendo, new from mobile or new from PC) to make up for any "scaling down" of a 2-3 million high-ARPU hardcore/core enthusiast slice from PS to PC.
Maybe could even do both that and see large gains in addition to it while doing so. I never said that was impossible.
I wasn't bringing any of this up to suggest one is "greater" than the other, whatever that means. However, some folks are adverse to the idea that platforms like PC provide any competition, even indirect competition, to consoles like PlayStation despite the two sharing roughly 90% of the same library at any given time and 100% of the same library over the course of a generation thanks to SIE's PC porting efforts.
And if anything, it'd be PC with a library advantage at this point because of the many PC games that don't have ports on PlayStation. VALORANT was one such game and is only now getting a PS5 version four years after being a PC exclusive. So many, even SIE now apparently, have become warped in this idea that only direct competitors matter, and that the only actual competitor PlayStation console has is Xbox, an also-ran at this point.
They are either foolish to think this, to ignore that indirect competitors can be far more effective than direct ones in various instances, or they do not care. And if they don't care, it's likely because they (SIE) have reasons and plans to take a drastically more console-agnostic approach going forward. Which is well within their choice; I don't bring any of this up to suggest they should stop. None of us have that power.
I just mention my POV because, personally, I don't favor or gel with SIE's approach; even if it's what works best for them at the end of the day, my tastes just lay elsewhere. But I do at least accept that their approach is the reality of how they're going about things, and I acknowledge this is what they want to do.
As a pc gamer i have no idea how you can say console equivalent pc gaming isn't expensive
I spent $1300 on my PC (RTX 3070, Ryzen 5600X) and its about on par with a PS5, and that was from a black friday sale, not even full msrp.
"buy used"
And what, get a burnt out card that was wasted on mining cryptocurrency? No thank you
I spent $1300 on my PC (RTX 3070, Ryzen 5600X) and its about on par with a PS5, and that was from a black friday sale, not even full msrp.
"buy used"
And what, get a burnt out card that was wasted on mining cryptocurrency? No thank you
It is already a tough sell on Steam… looks how Steam users done with Helldivers 2.
That PlayStation hate won’t end.
But at least on PS launcher only these they really have no issue with PlayStation will buy it… that are basically most that brought the game on Steam and didn’t bother about all the fake concern.
Last edited:
8 Years for PS+ Essentials = $640
The difference in hardware cost from PC to console isn't that big when you put it into perspective and you have room to not spend as much if you want.
For $259 you can buy a Rx 7600 now and play pretty much every game out there in 1080p. If you focus just on what you actually need for a decent build it won't end up costing too much, I feel that many people tend to overspend by just following what they see people showing off online.
Last edited:
8 years without PS+: $0
Can play single player games or f2p multiplayer games.
I can live without paying for online multiplayer on console.
Fair enough, but to anyone that feels like cloud saves and non F2P online multiplayer are a requirement those recurring payments will play a big role. Even some single player focused games like Elden Ring will be considerably worse experiences without multiplayer.
The most affordable way to play single player games is buying a console and buying used and/or reselling your games. PS5 at least has that still going on in it's favor and it's pretty much what might lead me to buy a PS5 Pro anyway.
Since I know I won't be playing it anytime soon and I'm not a a collector I ended up selling my FFVII Rebirth game 4 months after release for $10 less that what I paid for it new on release day.
Last edited:
This strategy works even better just replacing the PC part with PS4, or nothing at all and only letting people crossbuy your game between console and portable offerings.
I never said this. I said Sony let their 3P relationships sour. This extends back to even PS3 era as after That Game Company had success with Flower and Journey, they stopped working with PS. Go read their wiki article about the studio having little money and hiatuses for the staff whom were later brought-back. Instead of Sony capitalizing on that relationship, the games' exclusitivity and praise/trickle-down praise of PS consoles with these games, giving the team the further support and infastructure it certainly sounds like they needed, nope, instead the company's next game released for android and ios. Repeat this simillar idea for any number of industry people/development houses. The number of people who sort-of use Sony just to abandon them later on, specifically to pursue multiplatform is stupid.
I don't have all the figures/dates to pull off the top of my head, but yeah? Sony should absolutely have bought or share holder'ed their way into Capcom exclusitivity, whenever the time period is that we're talking about (2014ish?) that Capcom board said they wouldn't be opposed to buyout offers. Hell Sony were already half their with their MVC3 port and MVCI co-development (am I fudging the details? it's been so long). A new Vita with all needed buttons, buffed-up by the next Monster Hunter portable release by Capcom... yes they should have bought Capcom, don't play stupid.
And Sony didn't have money? I think we've seen that it doesn't always have to be hard cash. It can be shares/stock, loaned money, purchase but retain as a subsidiary... whichever ways deals can be done. Sony didn't "have the money". That seems disingenuous. Sometimes it's not about money? Companies could buy/merge for the synergistic reasons, of which I think Capcom is one of the better choices even now that they don't seem interested in selling, but back then would have been a no brainer.
The PS5... is riding off the back of PS3 turnaround, PS4 success, XB failures, Nintendo's choice to not compete on power/keep up with the technology of the day, Google and Amazon's ineptitude with Stadia and Luna (but they'll try again).
There are other ways to make (more) money than slep your exclusive games to Steam, GOG, Netflix or wherever else they're doing it, like a common whore.
>3070
>on par with a PS5
be for real. You got a higher quality card and spent more.
and those aren't just used prices. You can find those prices on newegg.
To not say it is false it is at least misleading.
PS5 success has more to do with it own feature set than PS3 turnaround or PS4 success.
The fact that any gamer that use PS5 can't go back to use PS4 already tells you how much it changed compared with previous consoles.
It is like moving from a tank type of controls from 20 years ago to Destiny godlike gunplay.
Plus the games for PS5 tells itself... never in a generation you have so many high quality games as you are having with PS5.
The output is being fantastic.
I will say more the only think that hold back PS5 from being the faster selling PlayStation was supply issues.
Europe for example received ridiculous shipment and that show how it is behind PS4.
Any other place that Sony could put a reasonable shipment PS5 is ahead PS4.
PS. Being the best selling PlayStation at the 4th year should not mean that it was suppose to sell more than PS2... PS2 sales after the 6th years is absurd... over 50 million units were sold after 2006 and that is how it reached 160 million... it keep selling more than 360 and PS3 for some years... if the sales dropped when PS360 gen started like happen nowdays with new generation PS2 should reach 110-130m max and not 160m.
Last edited:
There's a lot to be said about catering to different niches, with cost-effective lower budget exclusives that attract smaller underserved audiences while enriching the catalog as a side-effect. Not everything has to be AAA.
Games like Wipeout, Singstar and Buzz! made PS hugely popular in Europe. Those were the big hits that made gaming mainstream.
Last edited:
Well here's the thing: in upfront costs a PS5 is definitely cheaper, but if you want regular online MP access to all games, over the course of a full gen, you need at least PS+ Essentials. That's $80 per year for 7 years, or another $560. So just for the PS5 & a gen's worth of PS+ Essentials, you're paying around $1060. Suddenly that $1300 3070/5600X PC isn't looking as expensive.
Then also consider you're often paying less per game on PC than on a PS5. Even if say just $10 less, if you bought 20 $70 games over the course of a generation for both platforms, but you're paying $10 less on PC, now your costs are closer to $2,460 with the PS5 route vs....$2500 for the PC route. And don't forget, you're gonna have a lot of PC-exclusive games with the latter, unlimited mod options, and other uses outside of games and multimedia if you so choose.
So the biggest difference at this point is, what's the upfront cost you're willing to pay? That's the main pricing advantage console still has over PC when talking equivalent specs. But even that might be dropping off over time as years go on, SIE for example see very adverse to price drops like back in older gens and in fact, might price future systems even more than the current ones.
OP
OP
So a PC runs on the GPU alone? Because that's the only thing you're comparing. A GPU that costs as much as a console. LMAO. Also, lets' check Steam stats and see how many of those 140 million can actually run modern games, let alone at the PS5/Series X level. Good luck with that.
You PC players sure love pulling random MAU numbers to prove a point. The shithole of a country I live in has 90% of gamers on PC and they're not even PS4 level. So much for those MAUs.
@Etifilio
Not according to most data, which shows PC in decline. Both hardware and software. Gen Z is moving to consoles and phones, not PC.
@Nomen_Nescio
Hey look, another PC spec and MAU circlejerk.
@mibu no ookami @Yurinka
You have a very romantic idea of growth. You're subscribing to the idea of a CEO's version of growth. Infinite growth. That never existed, never will. It's not possible.
Sony can't be Microsoft. They don;t have the same infrastructure or the software pipeline to release everywhere. That kind of "growth" is only short term, if that. because you'll be stretching your resources so thin, everything breaks apart.
Going even further, you put out a subscription service outside of your hardware, and you're trading a consumer that buys from your store on a regular basis, on top of buying your hardware, to one that occasionally buys your subscription on a hardware not bought from you.
And to top it off, subscription services across all media, are losing subs.
P.S.
The PS5 is not losing Sony money as of mid 2021.
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/22015306/vpavic_4278_20201030_0292.jpg)
Sony’s $499 PS5 is no longer selling at a loss
The PS5 won’t be costly like the PS3.
www.theverge.com
Last edited:
They brought up GPU prices so I decided to refute GPU prices. Not exactly honest to now all of a sudden take the entire thing into consideration.
I'll happily admit that modern PCs aren't getting close to the cost efficency of a console, sure- shopping around for used parts and cheap, dubious quality shit isn't my idea of "beating a console value". But also most PCs aren't some 1500+ monstrosity you have to take a loan out on. You can get on by with a 700-800 dollar computer that will perform around a PS5.
I just brought them up.
3060, 3060 ti, 3070, 2060, 4060, 4070, 3080, etc. I don't see the issue here. The majority of cards are midrange Nvidias from 4-6 years ago which can run most modern games at decent settings.
Also if most PCs on the steam survey can't run "modern games" what explains Helldivers 2 selling better on PC than on PS5? or how Elden Ring and Baldur's Gate 3 are consistently topping the charts despite being games that'd chug on a PS4 equivalent build? How is a platform supposedly full of junkyard 3rd world PCs somehow selling graphically intensive and storage hogging AAA titles?
the 2 most popular resolutions being 1080p and 1440p, resolutions that the PS4 cannot natively run most games at?