180°

Sony: Financial Backbone Will Be 'Much Healthier, Much Earlier' with PS4

Push Square: "Let’s not beat around the bush, the PlayStation 4’s price point was a bit of shock. While we’d heard inklings that the company was going to price its next generation system much lower than previous efforts, very few imagined that it would hit $399.99. And that’s prompted some pundits to question whether the company is taking a large financial hit in order to achieve such an impressive price point. According to PlayStation president Andrew House, though, the 'financial backbone' surrounding the console couldn’t be healthier."

Read Full Story >>
pushsquare.com
Gandalf3982d ago

Must've cut a good deal with AMD and with whoever's making that RAM.

Arai3982d ago (Edited 3982d ago )

Hynix is supplying the RAM modules IIRC, they were the only ones at the time that could deliver that capacity.

Kleptic3981d ago

Their savings are mostly coming on the optical side i'd imagine...keep in mind, this is the first console Sony has ever made to not push a new phsyical media format. PS1 pushed CD-Rom, which was already around, but far from standard in the programming sense...PS2, DVD obviously, and PS3 started what the PS4 will continue using...that is a massive cut in R&D as well as manufacturing...

Their partnerships with BD and held patents keep those costs in check, and the format is already considerably affordable from a manufacturing stand point...especially compared to 2006.

while its true the basically off the shelf AMD parts will help the production costs...i'm pretty sure most of the saved money comes from using an acceptable optical format that is already tooled and in place from the last generation...and one that they pay no royalties for...

the strange thing is...this media format does not afford MS the same thing, though...They're paying costs just for being able to use the parts for BD, let alone the physical hardware needed...

So not only is MS fumbling left and right with this DRM/always-on BS...they're still feeling the fall out of backing HD-DVD years ago...with kinect 2.0, and all of the above...i'm fairly sure MS is taking more of a hit with the xbox one than Sony is, despite the $100 retail difference...

hellvaguy3981d ago

"backing HD-DVD years ago"

Was decent until you tripped up on this part. Xbox never back hd-dvd. I've never once seen a game released from ms on a hd-dvd. The hd-dvd was an optional accessory.

At the time it was wise for MS to remain neutral on the Blu-ray/hd-dvd format war. When MS released the 360 one year ahead of the ps3, Blu-ray players alone were selling for around $1,000.

nikoado3981d ago

@kleptic

Yep, blu drives are much cheaper now than at ps3 launch.

The off the shelf/semi custom APU is probably much cheaper than RSX and CELL for R&D and manufacture.

A HUGE cost saving is that they have to buy massive factories to manufacture their CPU like they did for CELL.

Overall, good design decisions and a well engineered console enabled them to reach their targeted launch price.

dcbronco3981d ago (Edited 3981d ago )

I know the article mentions the design but that has little to do with the lower cost. The most expensive parts of a console are the CPU and the GPU. In these console those two chips are one chip. In addition, the size of the chip matters. Last generation had two chips and both were 90nm. Now it one chip and 28nm. When that fabricate chips they use a wafer. The wafer are the same size, but if you have a smaller chip you can make more chips from that wafer. But the cost to make "print" the wafer is the same.

So this gen you start with a wafer that cost you ten dollars to "print" at 90nm. That gives you ten chips. And you pay that twice because you need a CPU and a GPU. With a APU the wafer cost ten dollars to "print" but the chip is much smaller, 28nm, so you get 50 chips. And since the APU has the GPU already on it you don't pay another ten dollars.

The 360 moved to a SoC(sort of APU) back in 2009 with the Slim. That is why stories of Xbox never making money are a joke. MS has been making money on every console for years, even before 2009. But if most knew that they would have demanded a price cut four years ago.

Start of last gen $10 makes five consoles. This generation $10 makes 50 consoles. That is the main reason these consoles are most likely being sold at a profit day one. The size of the chip makes other things on the console cheaper too. Smaller means cooler, which means less power, smaller power supply, smaller case, smaller motherboard, smaller fan. Doesn't seem like a lot until you multiply it by 10 million consoles.

And Blu-ray is much cheaper too.

GDDR5 is not though.

BitbyDeath3981d ago

@hellvaguy, MS didn't remain neutral. If they had then you would've also seen a Blu-ray addon.

They backed HD-DVD.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 3981d ago
dedicatedtogamers3981d ago

I believe most estimate that it costs Sony roughly $320 per PS4.

TronEOL3981d ago

And I'd say that's a fairly nice chunk made by Sony on each console.

If they make a full $80 on each console sold, they can earn ~$400,000,000 off 5 Million PS4's. And I'd say they'll definitely hit that worldwide without any issue before year end.

Then you count money made (after making back costs) on 3 first party launch titles (among other games), and PS+ Subscription profits.

I think the PS4 may very well make Sony a hefty chunk of change.

Also, don't forget about the Vita and PS3 that will surely still be selling (and the many Vita's to get sold when PS4 has been out for a while for remote play).

dcbronco3981d ago

They don't make the whole $80. Other things come into play. Those estimates are usually what's called a BOM(Bill of Materials). They don't include packaging, assembly construction of the console. Some do, some don't. Add advertising and shipping. If there are shortages sometimes you have to rush the shipments and that can be expensive. MS had to have 360's flown into the US at launch and that cost them a ton of money. Consoles are usually brought over on boats in huge numbers.

But overall Sony should make very good money in the first year and more as the generation goes on.

hellvaguy3981d ago (Edited 3981d ago )

Well ya paid online and a cpu that is much more economical. Im no genius, but that's pretty obvious ps4 will be more profitable. Also factor in the disposable controllers that you cant change out the batteries. Mo money, mo money, mo money!

That's not even factoring in if they end up outselling the competition in sales as many are predicting now.

Qrphe3981d ago

>disposable controllers

wut

hellvaguy3981d ago (Edited 3981d ago )

Thought I already pointed that part out. Batteries go bad all the time and degrade the amount of charge they hold. With sony you just toss out the controller (like apple products after a few years) instead of having the freedom to swap out rechargeable batteries.

Angeljuice3981d ago

If the battery fails you can use a screwdriver and replace it. They tend to outlast the controller anyway!

Boody-Bandit3981d ago (Edited 3981d ago )

hellvaguy

I have yet to have any PS3 controller not hold a charge. Even my launch sixaxis controllers still work flawlessly. Also, I have never had any PS3 controller stop working. The durability of the PS3 controller was built to outlast the console longevity IMO. I own 4 PS3 controllers and never had a need or a reason to purchase more.

JoeReno3981d ago

©brutally true facts my sixaxis controllers out lasted my 60gb and are still in use. Never had to replace a battery.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 3981d ago
GenericNameHere3981d ago

My phat PS3 YLOD'd, but my Sixaxis is still working like a champ after 6 years. Even the Sixaxis that came in with my uncle's launch day Phat PS3 is working perfectly. But hey, that's just my own experience. I'm not gonna pull out the "well, it happened to me/a friend, therefore it must have occurred/reflects to everyone" line.

Angeljuice3981d ago

I'm really heavy-handed with controllers, not just Sony's but all makes. Sony's tend to be very durable, one lasted me 4 years, third party pads3-6 months.

badz1493981d ago

disposable controller? dude, what are you talking about? sure the batteries are built in but you can change them easily and it cost just a fraction of the cost of a new controller.

I know this because I changed my 2 DS3's batteries and even changed the worn out analogue sticks.

Qrphe3981d ago

Like Applejuice already mentioned, it doesn't take much literacy (or time) to open up and change batteries in a controller.

Qrphe3981d ago (Edited 3981d ago )

lol I seemed to have misspelled your name

Sorry Angeljuice

D':

xhi43981d ago

Bro, I have 4 controllers and I've never had to replace ANY of them...

Lol...

So much more annoying having to buy and buy tons of AA batteries just to play.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 3981d ago
NateCole3981d ago

Well no Cell and Much cheaper Blu-day, HDMI and HD will do that for you.

hellvaguy3981d ago

I was with you on the first 2, but then I got lost on how hdmi and hd will make more profit.

NateCole3981d ago (Edited 3981d ago )

HDMI and HD component were more expensive then.

Basically Sony gained a lot of manufacturing experience with the PS3 that has allowed them to get the price down for PS4.

Nothing in the PS4 Sony had to break any bank in R&D and manufacturing like it was the case with the PS3 when they were dev and launching it.

Sony learn a lot from their difficult experience with the PS3 which obviously have helped them immensely for the PS4.

xhi43981d ago

Yeah, the PS3 when it first launched the largest HD size you could get was 60GB because it was so expensive and that was nearly $1000 in Australia ($599 in US)

Now 500GB hard drive is WAY cheaper to produce.

hellvaguy3981d ago (Edited 3981d ago )

oh HD he to say meant hard drive. That was a very weird choice of words. They way he put it I thought he was referring to high def.

green-cigarettes 3981d ago

I'm glad. They definitely deserve it.

120°

Let's Be Real, There Is Nothing "Micro" About Microtransactions Anymore

Microtransactions have gotten ridiculously overpriced in recent years, with titles now offering cosmetic skins worth more than some games.

Terry_B20h ago

Yup..this is 100% the sad truth

z2g4m ago(Edited 1m ago)

The elephant in the room tho is personal accountability. It’s easy (albeit basic) to blame the big, bad corpo, but microtransactions wouldn’t be where they are if gamers didn’t spend money on them. As it stands the MTs usually make more than the game. Publishers know raising game prices will cause backlash, so they do MTs to compensate. But the adult conversation is consumers determine the success of products with their wallets. So if MTs are a huge thing, it’s because we as consumers told them we like them by giving them a lot of money for them. So if you don’t want them to be a thing, convince your fellow gamers to stop buying them and expect that games will be decently more expensive. You all can disagree all you want, but reality is a bitch, and eventually you have to live in it.

isarai12h ago

I mean except for the amount of content you're paying for.

Hugodastrevas2h ago

There never was, the only time I paid for a microtransaction was on Blacklight Retribution (PS4) and it was because I enjoyed the game a lot so I felt the devs should get something for all that entertainment (€5 "membership")

-Foxtrot57m ago

The devs wouldn’t get that though, that shit goes straight to the higher ups who do f*** all let’s be honest.

Hugodastrevas8m ago

Probably, but I wasn't as cynical back then and €5 wasn't a big ask to get the guns with grinding instead of renting them, and the game was good (still is on the PS5/4)

200°

No Man's Sky Is Easily One Of Gaming's Greatest Comeback Stories

Despite No Man Sky's rocky launch, Hello Games managed to turn it into one of the best space exploration RPGs out there.

darksky2h ago

HG could have stopped after making 3-4 updates and the debt would have been paid to those why are crying about paying full price. However, they have continously provided free updates for the last 6-7 years. No other developer in hostory has ever done this and probably never will.
There are many AAA games that disappointed but the devs normally move on or close the studio rather than fix the game.

-Foxtrot20h ago

I hate the whole concept of "comeback story" because at the end of the day it doesn't remove the core issue we had in the first place, that we were lied to, it was disappointing and it launched with bare content to what was promised for years.

Any bad game can have a comeback story if it's supported enough after launch but for me if you launch in a terrible state then you had your chance. I can applaud you for what you've done after but at the end of the day there's not much of a choice since most gamers would blank your next product if you ditched your last game so fast, it's not about repairing the game but spending your time repairing gamers trust before you launch your next product otherwise it would be dead on arrival.

With these stories and the games being updated, the only way is up most of the time so of course it's going to improve the game and feel better over all, getting better and better as time passes. No Mans Sky, Sea of Thieves, Fallout 76 etc but then you have games like Anthem, Suicide Squad, Redfall and The Avengers where the devs just clearly moved on, now if they have another product people won't be as exited for it, I mean hell Guardians of the Galaxy was a great game but because of the Avengers it didn't help its sales since people were obviously still sour at that point.

I still think despite the improvements to games like No Mans Sky and Cyberpunk along with being better now overall the games are still not up there to what was promised and hyped as for years.

If we keep celebrating these “comeback stories” then unfortunately it only strongly supports the concept that these studios / publishers can continue to push half arsed broken products out for the sake of quick sales instead of waiting until they are fully finished. We need to condemn this awful behaviour or sadly we lose all voice and power as consumers.

Sonic188119h ago(Edited 19h ago)

I feel the same way about Cyberpunk 2077. I'm glad you mentioned that. I'm not a fan of comeback stories as well. But No man sky developer was a small indie team compared to CDPR. It's worse when it's coming from a AAA developer

Nacho_Z18h ago

"Any bad game can have a comeback story if it's supported enough after launch"

You make it sound so simple and easy. It's not. After release Hello Games poured countless hours into getting their game closer to what they originally wanted, without charging a penny to anyone. That's not normal.

The reason NMS and HG are held in such high esteem and calling them liars is a weak stance is the amount of work they've put into it, for free. They're not chasing a quick buck, they've dedicated their lives over the last few years to giving their fans the game everyone wanted.

-Foxtrot18h ago(Edited 18h ago)

They are liars though...

We are not revising history here, I'm sorry but we're not

They built this game up for years and they launched it knowing full well it wasn't up to scratch to what they originally showed off or hyped it up to be.

"They're not chasing a quick buck, they've dedicated their lives over the last few years to giving their fans the game everyone wanted"

And like I said above most of that comes from the fact that if they had just moved on straight away nobody would have supported their next game. They've washed most of that sour taste away after supporting No Mans Sky so now they are doing a new game which more people feel like they can support and get excited for.

Anyway how can you say "You make it sound so simple and easy. It's not" and then make the point that "Hello Games poured countless hours into getting their game closer to what they originally wanted, without charging a penny to anyone"

This means that if a small team like this can turn a game around then big AAA games like Suicide Squad, Redfall, Anthem and the like should have been able to do it no problem, oh but that's right they didn't want to put the time or effort into it. They can do it but some people just decide not to.

Blad3runner006h ago(Edited 6h ago)

"You make it sound so simple and easy. It's not. After release Hello Games poured countless hours into getting their game closer to what they originally wanted, without charging a penny to anyone. That's not normal."

People paid for the game at launch and got lied to. Now the game is what it SHOULD have been from the start (what people paid for) and we should be happy they aren't charging EXTRA? Its free because people ALREADY paid for the game at launch.

People PAID for what the game is in its current state (what it should have been at launch), not what it was when it released. Charging people AGAIN would result in even more backlash.

anast5h ago

"You make it sound so simple and easy. It's not. After release Hello Games poured countless hours into getting their game closer to what they originally wanted, without charging a penny to anyone. That's not normal."

They already charged for the full price game. All of that work is owed because it was already paid for.

milohighclub8h ago(Edited 8h ago)

Whatever happened at launch is in the past. By your logic they could have supported it for a year got it to the project they promised then stopped but they didn't. They're still supporting it to this they, they've released more content post than pretty much any game I can think off. More than most MMOs. They didn't have to go this far but they have and don't have any plans of stopping. All for free too.
Yeah they had a shit launch and they've apologised, learned and more than made up for it. I was pissed off at them at launch, but not petty enough to keep slandering them 7 years later.
You have much bigger studios releasing half assed games and fixing it later or even worse not even bothering.

anast5h ago

The DLC costs money. But yeah, people are hanging on to this one longer because of their previous reputation.

TheCaptainKuchiki7h ago

And it doesn't change the fact that the game is a boring procedurally generated environment in which your repeat the same actions over and over again with no real purpose. I hate when they say that the game became good.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 5h ago
thorstein20h ago

I really enjoyed it at launch and had every trophy by August 2016.

The experience I had is no longer in the game: It was just me and my ship. It was a survival game and the feeling of loneliness in the universe was pervasive. There was no way to ruin too far from your ship and, in an emergency, you grenaded a hole in the ground to survive.

I miss that aspect, but since then, I love what they've done.

Hugodastrevas18h ago

I'd say it's THE definitive comeback story

TheGamingHounds16h ago

Final Fantasy 14 takes that one imho

CrimsonWing695h ago(Edited 5h ago)

Yep and the way they actually did it where Bahamut destroyed the original FF14 and the realm was “reborn” seals it as the best way to do something like this, lol.

jwillj2k417h ago

Oh great another story about the cleanest shirt in a bin of dirty laundry.

Show all comments (24)
100°

The Holy Gosh Darn: Ozan Drøsdal Talks Dialogue Skipping Mechanics And Why He Hates The Word Quirky

Ozan Drøsdal tells TheGamer about The Holy Gosh Darn, the final part of the Tuesday Trilogy.

Read Full Story >>
thegamer.com