Did Sony Lose Out by Pricing the PS4 at $400?

Next to Sony’s announcement that they would not be including digital rights management in their Playstation 4 plans the $400 price tag was probably the biggest applause line. So the idea that this price point could be a mistake probably seems patently absurd.

[iamnsuperman]

Well I don't know. We will have to see in a years time to see if their strategy worked or not

[Gazondaily]

I don't think we have to wait a few years. The price is extremely competitive and no doubt is playing big part in the huge pre-order numbers.

[guitarded77]

I think the crowd response at the E3 announcement proved it was a win. Sure, they could have charged more... but they didn't... and that makes people happy.

[ThatKanadianKid]

Fan wise they certainly won, great press and everything etc.

[Hydrolex]

No, it's an absolute win

[mp1289]

Article: "As great as a $400 price is for gamers, the Playstation 4′s overall full-generation experience could conceivably be better faster if it was to launch at the same price as Xbox One in my opinion."

me: and thats why your opinion is not important.

[blitz0623]

The only reason $400 is a "Win" is because the Xbox One is at $500.

It's all driven by competition. People who say $400 is an awesome price are only fooling themselves. If the X1 were to launch at $300, we'd only hear "Well $400 is still reasonable and okay"

[Blastoise]

@blitz0623 ^

"People who say $400 is an awesome price are only fooling themselves"

Really? Why is that?

I remember when the specs were released and it was revealed the PS4 had 8gGB Gddr5 and everyone went nuts expecting the PS4 to maybe even be more expensive than the PS3 with that kind of power. Now it's revealed to be $400 and everyone's trying to downplay a very appealing price point.

What's that all about?

[Diver]

Did MS lose out by pricing at $500?

[Blachek]

They left money on the table pricing that far below the competition with hardcore gamers. More casuals will consume systems based on the pricepoint.

[Eddie20101]

no ahhhhh NO.

[blitz0623]

@Blastoise

I'm not downplaying the $400 tag. I'm just saying people wouldn't say it's a GREAT or AWESOME price if the competition ie the Xbox One were to launch at a similar or even cheaper price.

$400 for the specs is REALLY GOOD. But let's face it, if the X1 were to launch at $300 (for argument's sake) nobody would be praising $399.

[The_Con-Sept]

A lot of elements are at play. Microsoft has still left a huge burn mark on our minds when they first unveiled their DRM policy.

Sure they flipped and flopped but if our own history in politics teaches us anything... In the end.... PlayStation 4 will be the more popular choice. Any fanboy can try to argue this but look at history for a minute. Who won all presidential elections? Consistent candidates. Why? No one likes instability. Doesn't matter if they say anything. The simple fact that they flailed around like a fish out of water sends people a mixed up message. No pamphlet, flyer, or public broadcast message can't change people's minds in America. If you don't remain consistent then a majority of people will not be interested in your campaign.

I expect to see the race to be close this gen but we've already gone through so many console wars since the 80's. Anyone can see this set up is a lot different but it is strikingly similar to what we have already seen go down.

Sorry but people might have a short memory span, but sometimes it is that lingering doubt that causes people to swerve one way or another.

[shoddy]

I don't care if Sony loose out or not.
It's a win win for me.

[mistertwoturbo]

It paid dividends to the X360 launching at a lower price point, so no Sony is going to Gain in the long run. They could keep that price point going for a lot longer and if they do drop the price, they can do it in smaller increments like $50 instead of $100 like they did with the PS3.

[gaffyh]

Sony will make up so much money from royalties, that it makes sense to have a lower than expected price point. If they sell loads of consoles, especially in the initial stages, they will easily rake in the money on third party titles, and even more on exclusive games. If you add on to that PS+, and any other future services like Gaikai, it shows you their mindset.

They are coming at this generation like they are the underdog, like they are launching the first PlayStation ever, but this time they are in an even better position because they have established IPs, and the best and largest first party in the whole industry. I hope they do well because they deserve to be rewarded for providing us the console at a VERY reasonable price. Even if the Xbone was the same price with Kinect, there is an argument in favour of PS4 in terms of power.

[trafalger]

$400 is better than $500, its that simple.

[guitarded77]

@ blitz0623

You say: "People who say $400 is an awesome price are only fooling themselves. If the X1 were to launch at $300, we'd only hear "Well $400 is still reasonable and okay"

I'm gonna disagree with you on that. After the initial announcement of the PS4 and XBOX One, I had already decided that the PS4 was day 1, and XBOX One was not because of the policies.

I had already set in my mind that I was willing, and expecting to pay $500 (possibly $600, but I didn't think Sony would do that after the PS3 launch). When it was announced at $400, I was surprised and it was just making a good thing better for me.

Your point that people thinking $400 is a good deal being BS, is BS in itself. We knew the hardware wasn't going to come in at $300... anyone expecting that doesn't know anything about hardware. But it is certainly reasonable for people to think "$400 is awesome" without even factoring in the XBOX One... I did... and I'm sure as hell not fooling myself.

[Gamingcapacity]

@Blachek

You hit the nail on the head. Casuals will flock to the lower price.

Lower price mean more people will but it. More people buying could mean more profit from hardware, depends on what the profit/lose compared to the competition.

What it certainly will mean is that if more people buy your console, you will make more money on software and online subscriptions.

So even though they might make more money on each console sold, it could hurt them in the long term.

We will see each company battling for that space under the TV left from the 7th gen console. Competition is great for us consumers.

[President]

''Next to Sony’s announcement that they would not be including digital rights management ''

What kind of crap is this? Every system has drm, the PS4 is just much less restrictive. Lol at spelling it out instead of typing drm.

[BISHOP-BRASIL]

Anyone the least familiar with console gaming industry knows the standard model is to make the console available as cheap as a company can afford in order to maximize game sales, to which they have a piece of the profits. Most people only have one console, but how many games each player have? That's where the money is, not on the console.

Think of it this way. Let's say Sony sell 10 million (just to use an easy number for example) PS4s at 400 dollars in a quater, but if it was at 450 they would have an estimate of 7 million consoles (I'm assuming sales some 30% down) in the same time frame and those extra 50 bucks are pure profit. Well, it may look like it's paying off at first because you got 0 profit from consoles at 400 while at 450 that's 350 million in profits.

Now let's assume an attach rate of 1.5 to 2 monthly, so say those PS4 owners would buy 5 or 6 games in that quater, being that only the ones paying 400 would buy one game more (since they made an initial economy on console price), but either way Sony takes 10 bucks from every game sold. So PS4 at 400 bucks sell 60 million games (600 million in profit) while at 450 bucks it sells 35 million games (350 million in profits).

Well, but 700 million (350+350) is still better than 600 million total profits, right? Well, not exactly. You can only sell so many consoles, eventually everyone that wants one will already have one, tipping the balance over time to games being the critical source of income rather than consoles, also if you manage to sell more games with your console price strategy you gather more support from devs and publsihers (and, portentially, more profits down the line).

[Tatsuya]

Price was never a factor for me. I would still buy it if cost $1000. But, it's great that
SONY knows what we, the gamers want and deserve. There couldn't be a better price.

[_-EDMIX-_]

LOL! Wait for what? PS3 at a higher price as outsold 360 at a lower.

Mind you Sony STILL has games for PS3 for this year and next. Thus, they are in it for the long run! No PS system has sold under 77 million units and PS4 doesn't seem to be the beginning of it LOL!

Sony has MORE teams this gen, is focused on in-house development and has the lower price point and the better hardware by a really large gap. Its easy to see that yes...Sony will make its return on PS4.

What? Will a GT not come out? Will sequels to the Last Of Us not come out? Will MGS5 or FFXIV not come out? I mean damn buddy, I'm not sure what you don't know but...those games sell and will be on PS system thus it will sell pretty much like PS3 if not more. Its at cheaper price point faster.

[HammadTheBeast]

Under 80 mill now.

[Bathyj]

Getting out the gates strong, and letting everyone know PS4 is the machine to get is the most important thing in the early days.

PS3 sold faster than X360 from the moment it launched but the fact it was always behind in overall sales until recently lead some people to believe that it was a failure.

Any short term lose of profits will pale in comparison to the long term benefits of starting strong, and securing this generation. If PS4 gets a lead over XBOne, I dont think it will ever lose it.

Sony arent a company that worries about the next 6 months, they worry about the next 10 years.

[Campy da Camper]

Exactly. People need to remember that forecast analysts don't think 6 months out but 6 years. Sony learned a lot this gen. In addition to meeting the wants of consumers and devs they learned what sells and what won't. I see huge launch numbers but then rather than a steep level off they will be bringing us more features and surprises to maintain momentum. That with good marketing and most importantly, GAMES, they are set for a good run.

People argue titan fall this kill zone that but Sony has massive 1st dev support and with the dev friendly hardware third party devs are clamoring to make games for them, too. HUGE turnabout from this gen.

Games, games, games with dev friendly policies and strong, well built hardware is huge for Sony right now.

[gobluesamg]

Yes and they are playing this well. A lower starting price and charging the yearly rate for Plus which gamers will gladly renew after they try it. They will be making a much better profit margin than this Gen.

[joeorc]

"Sony arent a company that worries about the next 6 months, they worry about the next 10 years."

100% for the truth, thats why there is something called a "business plan"

every playstation system is on a 10 year plan! when they say 10 years, its not somthing they just say willy nilly, you have to have a outline, a prospectus. etc. they are on a 10 year plan because that is what the "business plan" is outlined for!

[Rimeskeem]

The people who are getting the xbox one keep saying they are planning on getting the ps4 when the better exclusives come out

[ThatKanadianKid]

Personally, I would have bought the PS4 if it was at $500 even without the camera included. Is the $400 price a good thing? Duh, but at this day and age I've become accustomed to spending anywhere from $500 or more for new technology. And for as much use as I plan on getting out of the PS4 and Xbox One, I wouldn't mind paying the higher entry fee.

Obviously it's a great thing for consumers, but Sony I'm sure could have used the extra money. I don't think Microsoft is too worried about having their system cost $100. Just my two cents.

[HammadTheBeast]

I think having PS+ for MP allowed them to get away with a lower price.

[awi5951]

@ThatKanadianKid

With amd cards always use old drivers the games always run better. I use the 12.8 cap on my 7850 2gb crossfire build. And never buy Pc's they always rip you off. They only way i think you could get a deal is pay cyberpowerpc.com to build a pc for you. When i was lazy and didnt want to build one i got one with tower,memory,quadcore,powersou rce,motherboard for 380 then i put the graphcis card i wanted in myself.

[awi5951]

I cant spend that type of money on consoles anymore especially if i can get the same performance from a pc game at a lower cost. You know a 7850 costs 150 dollars its on par with the gpu in the ps4. So ill buy 400 dollars of upgrades for my PC instead.

[ThatKanadianKid]

I would agree with you, but with the gaming PC I bought for the same price as the PS4, it still has trouble running games that it should have no issues running due to drivers or whatever else is wrong. I like consoles cause I know when I buy the game out of the package it will work out of the package with no hitches unless the developer screwed somewhere.

[black0o]

good for u

[extermin8or]

But the console environment and PC environment is totally different. a gpu in the ps4 will perform better gaming wise than the same GPU in a pc of similar pricing. Because on PC the games are designed to work on the highest and lowest and everything inbetween tech wise-on a console they only have to run on the specs of the ps4 in a closed enviroment.

[awi5951]

@extermin8or
LOL no it wont lol you are delusional. On pc you can max your draw distance, max your texture detail, max the amount of obects onscreen. Then set your shadows to high or medium and all other settings to a mixture of high and medium and still run at a higher resolution than consoles and get 30 fps more and still look way better than console you are crazy lol. Pc is flexable we can max the eye candy part of games then cheat in other ways lol so you have no idea what you are talking about lol. We can change our physics stress on our cards, the amount of tessellation, the amount of AA, you cant do that on console your are locked and if the developers messes up your stuck with it there are ways for us to fix developers incompetence.

[illustratedDEO]

actually my amazon KillzoneShadowFall bundle is priced at 499 am I complaning, nope.Soon to be Proud PlayStation 4 owner get hype hater's gonna hate lmao

[Prcko]

i hope sony won't lose money with this price

[HammadTheBeast]

Probably not, only reason Xbox One is priced higher is because of Kinect.

[_FantasmA_]

And because of TV. Call of Duty. TV. Dogs. Fish. New advance AI. TV. Sports. TV. Those things cost money.

[HappyWithOneBubble]

.

[okmrman]

horrible logic

[iceman06]

Most companies take initial losses on consoles and make them up on software and peripherals, etc. Sony will be fine. In fact, if pre-orders are any indication, they will start to see more and more profit from the games division. They were taking a $170 loss per console on PS3 and they made it to PS4. With the support now looking strong and from day one, it seems like a pretty good scenario.

[PSN_ZeroOnyx]

Actually PS3 hardware became profitable back in 2010.

[iceman06]

@PSN_ZeroOnyx...yeah, I know. It took them several years to cut the costs and make profit from the console. I'm glad that Sony was willing to take the hit in order to bring more technology to market on the PS3. I got one day one and had NO issues with that.

[_FantasmA_]

Knowing how well Sony supports their system, I'd pay $600. Sure it would take me forever to pay it off, but the PS3 was and still is worth every penny I spent, and even though I just bought it 2.5 years ago, I would gladly have bought a fat back in 2006 if I had known what I know now.

[rezzah]

If it was at $500, I would have waited. I already set my mind to not paying more than $450 for the PS4.

[Firan]

I'm pretty sure it's better than PS3's initial pricing.

[EXVirtual]

Well maybe, but having that price tag gives Sony an advantage. With all the PS4 pre-orders, I don't think they'll be losing money.

[CGI-Quality]

Silly viewpoint, I think. It's like for some, they're damned @ $600 and damned @ $400.

No, we know nothing for certain, but this will be a very different gen for PlayStation! That much IS a certainty, and the entry price will be one of its biggest helpers.

[FateoftheGame]

We live in a consumer society that is not always economically stable. Anytime you can buy something for a decent price is a good thing. I just don't see how one can predict a company "losing out" by appealing to the consumer society I just described.

[Chaos_Raiden]

I find that the price for PS4 is reasonable enough for everyone to buy.

[HappyWithOneBubble]

Of course there will be loses in the beginning. PS4 is definitely more future proof than XB1.

[xReDeMpTiOnx]

There was an article already posted that was said ps4 costs less to produce than the current ps3 so I bet they are making a slight profit on each console or defiantly a minimal loss

[FrigidDARKNESS]

Every console manufacturer takes a loss in the first three years, however due to Sony past finaL situation the last few years they just weren't in a position to take a loss with the PS4. In a statement from Sony several months ago they weren't going to sell the ps4 at a loss.
http://www.eurogamer.net/ar...

[iceman06]

You are correct. Sony put themselves in a position where they didn't have to take such a huge loss. They did a LOT of in house R&D stuff with the PS3 and built facilities for chip production. This time, they share the burden with other companies. So, even the overhead for the PS4 is lower. They could have still taken the hit, as most hardware companies do, but why do that when you have others invested in your profitability as well? I guess it's a new generation of business as well.

[jmc8888]

They're going to make more money at $400 then Xbox One at $500.

You know why? Because the spy device known as Kinect2 costs almost as much as the rest of the hardware. Some say EVEN MORE than the rest.

Kinect2 is a very expensive part.

It wouldn't surprise me that if Sony had priced the PS4 at $329 they would be even with Microsoft charging $499.

Also remember what that spy device costs you, it made them feel they needed to be cheap on the actual specs.

No seriously. The reason they went with DDR3+eSRAM was because it was CHEAPER than GDDR5. Why did they need that to be cheaper? Because of Kinect2.

What did they get by going 'cheaper'? Well simple.

A more complex architecture that is if not coded right will drastically reduce performance. Only 1/3 of the bandwidth goes through the DDR3. The other 2/3rds is only accessible if you take the time to code it, and then do it right.

Just like how developers COULD take the time to code for PS3's cell processors strengths and make a better game, they usually went the easier way and that left many ports substandard.

Now the Xbox One is in that place. It's not quite as hard as the cell, but there will be many games that don't take full advantage of both and thus reduce it's capability, all because MS wanted the cheaper option.

Oh and if the rumors about chip yields and overheating relating to the eSRAM implementation are true, then they might have to downclock the overall unit and/or risk hardware failures like they experienced with RRoD. I had one of those.

So Kinect2 defines the Xbox One. Because they felt they needed to include it, that set off chain reactions in everything else. Ones that make it harder to code for, potential to degrade its power, and potential for reliability problems.

Then you get to pay $100 more for weaker specs before any modification and have the ultimate spy device to exploit you by the gov't, Microsoft, and thousands of corporations.

So no...I think Sony did it right. They focused around what gamers really want, and didn't let a spy device whose utility is mostly gimmicks make it less powerful, more expensive, harder to code for, and potentially less reliable.

[corvusmd]

You are so confused. You clearly have a little bit of knowledge on the subject, but that makes you more "dangerous" because now you are assuming you know a lot more than you do. The simple fact that you call the Kinect 2.0 a spy device lets me know you cannot be reasoned with, so I won't try. True MS is making no profit on the XB1 where-as the PS4 makes $25 per console which is a lot for console sales. MS has publicly stated that Kinect cost less than half of the rest of the device, but no one really knows exactly how much (outside of MS). The Kinect is an amazing device if you like it or not. True, PS4 Ram costs more, but as we are seeing it doesn't translate to the better performance that most were hoping. XB1 also included ESRAM and a Dedicated Soundcard which PS4 did not...not to mention that XBL also got a HUGE upgrade whereas PSN did not, MS also spent a ton on R&D towards developing a three tier OS that PS4 did not...so please focus on the whole picture, not JUST what you want to focus on and what helps the argument you want to spit out. PS4 and XB1 do NOT operate the same way, and therefore do NOT need the same RAM. The more we learn, the more it is showing that XB1 with a dedicated sound card and use of DX 11.1/2 is able to do much more with less. The RAM in the XB1 works at a lower latency, which benefits the XB1 architecture, the speed of the PS4 RAM benefits the PS4. So it's really just down to games and if you like playing online now....which is why I prefer XB1 this gen. Arguing that PS4 makes much better looking games simply doesn't work right now, because we can actually see the games running in demos, and on XB1 they typically run at a higher FPS and look better. Quote all the paper specs you want....but because of things like facts, now with things the way they are, PS4 would take a huge hit if they matched the XB1 price point because they have much less to offer.

[_-EDMIX-_]

I agree with you, but not in the way you think.

Understand that Kinect's price is "here say" no one knows how much this thing cost besides MS. For all we know its just a better version of Kinect that doesn't cost that much more then Kinect (MIND YOU what Kinect cost TO MAKE isn't = to what it cost in stores PLEASE understand that)

So....they can be adding in a device, putting in a $500 price tag yet we don't really now that Kienct is the reason for the extra $100. Remember now, XONE has the lessor of the hardware and even when you add in the PS Eye, its not the cost of an XONE. So...even if we add in the ram.....its still not the cost of an XONE. SO leave it at this, if Sony is making $25 off of the PS4 (not really even sure about that as a fact anyway) then how much is MS really making off of this camera add on?

After the whole DRM and 180 affair its clear that MS is good at putting something in to "justify" something else. Always online was the reason for "cloudz' and now all of a sudden without always online "cloudz" is till posiable? Well.......what if it always was? So...the always online deal was a lie? You really didn't need a crap load of people "always be online" for cloud to work? How much are they lieing about?

Even the whole thing about Kinect not working out XONE, I mean damn people don't be so damn stupid to believe they could make a OS that ran off a controller THIS GEN AND KINECT...yet next gen it JUST can't be done.

DRM and Always online couldn't be turned off like a "switch" too right? Cloud needed everyone to always be online for it to work for everyone else right? Hell even gamesharing they are saying they might bring back? So....did we even need those things for...anything? How much don't we REALLY need to work this damn machine? It seems to me they are caught in a lie and Kinect is just another 180 waiting to happen, don't think that its this uber expensive camera, most things with motion sensing are SOFTWARE related not entirely hardware.

[ABeastNamedTariq]

@corv

Uhhh...the PS4 does have a dedicated sound card (can't link the source because I'm on my phone, ain't nobody got time for that. Feel free to Google it though, Cerny already explained that).And I like how you think that's a game changer-- as if it'd have some huge advantage over the PS4..made me laugh.

Also, do you seriously not think that PSN hasn't been upgraded? (Don't 300,000 server me either. They're not all meant for gaming.

Those 3 OS's hog resources, silly goose. Games'll still get the job done, but with a more set amount of RAM.

I'm getting an Xbox sooner or later, but come on. Kinect + TV (which requires a cable box)? That's about it, my friend. And exclusives (I like Forza), of course. My buyer justification detector is going crazy.

[corvusmd]

Having a dedicated sound card that does all it's own processing is a HUGE advantage being as sound takes a lot of processing. True PS4 has a sound card, in the same way it has "cloud" By name yes, it has one, but not even close to the same level that the XB1 does. The XB1 soundcard will process all sound without the use of RAM where as the PS4 sound card does not allow for that, so yes it's a pretty big advantage.

PSN has been upgraded, but still isn't even as good as CURRENT XBL, you don't want to hear the whole 300,000 server thing because it destroys your argument. New XBL will make PSN look like a joke. PSN has the "cloud" but it's the same kind of cloud Current XBL has...and PSN will have less than the current 15,000 servers that XBL has now. Another huge advantage.

No matter how much resources the 3 OS hog, it won't be more than the 3gb of ram dedicated to do so...just like the PS OS...dumb argument.

You clearly are ignoring facts, or just have not learned enough yet. The fact that you dismiss huge advantages as no advantage tells me immediately you've been sold on paper specs. Have fun gaming this gen

[iceman06]

You know you could just say "I like Xbox One better because I like Xbox games better" and save everybody the trouble of reading a diatribe that amounts to the same specs on paper speculation that you accuse others of...right?
The consoles aren't out. The games aren't done, we don't even know the full launch for either console. We haven't seen XBL or PSN for the new generation. Yet, you have answers for it all...based on...specs on paper.

[PSN_ZeroOnyx]

Amen

[josephayal]

maybe $80 p/ Console

[andrewer]

Don't think so. PS3 was expensive because of the blu-ray player (that wasn't common like today) and the incredible used-by-army-to-make-a-superco mputer-cluster processor lol
Now that blu-ray technology is more common and cheaper, that is actually a fair price for the PS4.

[corvusmd]

Now I don't think they could get away with that...maybe RIGHT at the moment where they announced no DRM and XB1 still had it, it would have made a difference, but now it seems like the benefits of getting a PS4 is almost solely down to the price point unless you hate all XB exclusives and love all PS ones. If they were priced the same now, PS4 would probably take a huge hit

[Jaqen_Hghar]

Cause PS3 is getting thrashed by 360 by being $50 more expensive still and being $200 more at certain points this gen as well as a year behind...oh wait. Prices are skewed towards Xbox=PS victory. Prices skewed towards Sony or even=bigger PS victory. They've proven they can win as the most expensive now we'll see how dominant they are being less expensive.

[XboxFun]

It was definitely a great move by Sony to wait for the Xbox reveal for price and then take out their camera and undercut the X1's original price. You would only get praise and cheers from the masses.

Definitely a good deal in price when on the shelves.

[PSN_ZeroOnyx]

That's not how it works in the real world. The price and exclusion of the camera was set well before M$ pooed down their legs at E3.

[Jaqen_Hghar]

A man thinks they should have included the camera (but made it clear it COULD be disconnected) and made it $450. That way it's still less expensive than Xbox (PS3 proved PS can outsell Xbox even at $200 MORE expensive so even being $500 would have put Sony in the lead) and then you can copy all the Kinect features at a bit less resolution/framerate. Same basic experience.

[OC_MurphysLaw]

Personally I think Sony left Money on the table. Once then new the Xbox One was $500 with camera, I think Sony could have easily come out with $425 not including the camera...even $450 and maintained that crowd excitement. Any extra dollars they could have scratched out while staying lower by $50 or more just would be money they could really use right now. Lets say they sell just 1 million PS4s at launch... an extra $25 per unit adds up very fast.

[unknownbystander]

With the continuous decline of our economy, I'd have to say that $400 dollars is the borderline ok mark. $300 is probably the sweet spot for a gaming console. However, I do understand the tech that was put inside this might be a little expensive. The average consumer, which is the majority of the buyers, do not care for the tech inside, but care for how much the thing eats their wallets. I'd say that the Wii U right now is leading in price friendliness. The problem with the Wii U is that it is not widely known, and there not a lot of games out for it yet. To think that it sold this much is unfathomable. We, the gaming community, are the minority of the people who know more info. about gaming than the average consumer. Sony is putting all their bets on the PS4 because they need to gain profit. With their junk status, they already sold their New York City Sony headquarters to gain a little profit. Honestly, I do not think that the PS4 and Xbox One will fly off the shelves (Hey, I could probably be wrong!). People feel like they are going to be sold out for months because of the hype that's going on for PS4 and Xbox One. Although I look forward to seeing these consoles release, our hype in the gaming community might or might not move towards the general masses. So all this prediction about Nintendo being doomed or the PS4 winning next gen is just speculation with the information we have so far. The real question is, which of the 3 companies will attract the general mass? As they are the key to the victory of your beloved console of choice.

[CertifiedGamer]

Sony won with the current amount of consumers who want to jump into its platform for the next few years as opposed to Microsoft has done a crappy job convincing consumers.

[Majin-vegeta]

You tell me??
http://youtu.be/PzDsYEPkSc4

[Peppino7]

I'm sure its not that much of a loss as it was for the ps3 since there isn't much NEW hardware like a blu ray player.

[MultiConsoleGamer]

Yes it would have sold just as much at the $500 price point, even without the camera.

[hazelamy]

i think this is the first time i've seen anybody suggesting the PS4 is too cheap.

[o-Sunny-o]

Sony shocked me that PS4 costed 400$ and it will supported for more than 10 years. My cellphone is 300$ and it doesn't even last a year. I love what Sony has with PlayStation. I will buy into their products. ^~^

[S2Killinit]

well I think it will be really nice on my wallet, thats all I know. I'm attending university so cash is hard to come by and I'm glad I can get the best console for such a cheap sticker price.