Weird because i could have sworn Sony faced a company that has waaaaaaay more money than them, and gave that company 2 very VERY bad beat downs in 2 separate gens.
Seems like whatever money that conglomerate company has doesn't matter. Lol
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
PlayStation 4 becomes the fastest home console to reach 100 million unit sell in
- Thread starter Era of not Yakuza
- Start date
Weird because i could have sworn Sony faced a company that has waaaaaaay more money than them, and gave that company 2 very VERY bad beat downs in 2 separate gens.
Seems like whatever money that conglomerate company has doesn't matter. Lol
Exactly. As if selling 100 million 3 times is luck. If it wasn't for a $600 price tag, they would 4 for 4 right now.
Wouldn't it make more sense to just say that Sony has got this far off their own strengths far more than anything else?
I mean, it is one thing if they only outsold their competitors by a modest amount. Nah, they now have 3 out of 4 gens with a 100M+ selling console and even their worst selling console wasn't far off from that feat.
I think that says Sony has built a very strong market that will respond to their hardware releases regardless of the competition.
MS and Nintendo can be on their A game and it won't stop Sony from having similar success assuming they don't screw up the launch.
it wasn't even the initial $600 price tag. The PS3 sold 87 million units. Not being able to cost reduce it (mostly because of Nvidia) meant sony killed the PS3 2 years earlier than it did the PS1 or PS2.
The PS1 outsold it's closest competitor by 70 million units.
The PS1 outsold it's closest competitor by 125 million units.
The PS4 will likely outsell it's closet competitor (The XBONE) by 80+ million units.
Only the PS3 didn't outsell all of it's competition, and that's primarily because Sony launched it at the equivalent of $760.
Last edited:
Goodness. I already commented on this. I said they had it easy in terms of their competitor's fuck ups; I did not say it was easy to sell 100m consoles.
Although clearly it helps achieve your goals when your competitors mess up though, as we saw Xbox 360 benefit from PS3's high launch price in a similar manner.
But Xbox 360 was also successful on its own merits, just as PlayStation consoles are always successful on theirs. There are multiple factors.
Sony were real smart to capture this gen with the move to digital. Now so many people have digital catalogues that will be a factor when it comes to next gen. Jumping ship to a different brand would mean giving up all those digital games so you are pretty much locked in to Sony's ecosystem now as long as Sony have full backwards compatibility with them
Optical drives and HDDs are already become dirt cheap there is no more saving there even more so when tech is moving past them .
Ram prices became more expensive during this gen and as we move on can also be more expensive.
They are certain parts in PS4 that not going to get cheaper because they already hit the bottom and will always be part of the BOM making the $99 price point a no go .
EDIT even if you exchange it for other parts like flash it will still always be cost of lets says $20 for eg .
I don't really get your point here as we are talking about them selling the console at $99 years later and not now .
Also Sony could have made more console last year and sell more but they choose to limited the number of $199 bundles .
Since there balancing between user base and profit .
I am not certain how much profit they are making on the console right now but what ever it is they want to keep since they can sell more at $199.
We will most likely get a price drop as they move to a new node but even then i only expect $50 since they want to keep a margin on the console .
Last edited:
If the parts are already "dirt cheap" they're not what's keeping the system at $299. As I said before, every system going back to the PS1 sans the N64 had "ram" and "optical drives" in them. You could get those systems down to the $99 range easily by the end of their lifespan.
The things that kept the Ps3 from being sold as cheaply as the PS1 and PS2 were (both of which were sold for $99-129 MSRP) was the cost of the RSX and the Cell processor. Neither of these are a concern for the PS4, it is much cheaper to make than the PS3 and far more profitable.
Sony could sell the PS4 at $99 profitably *if they wanted to* because digital sales are far more profitable than disc based sales are, as is revenue from digital advertising.
Here is what I mean:
We don't know what rates Sony is charging, but The PS4 has already substantially outsold the userbase of Live on the 360. Advertising on PSN can bring in tens of millions of dollars a year even if no one buys a single thing from Sony.
RAM and Optical drive costs are negligible by now, but it literally does not matter. Digital streams bring in revenue that drastically exceeds their cost on a per unit basis. They'd make up the entire cost of Ram and the drive running a single advertisement in December.
There is nothing stopping the PS4 from being sold at $99 except for Sony not wanting to. It would still be profitable.
That is exactly what I think will happen. It will cost them $599 to make and they will sell it to us for $499.
They lost roughly $60 this gen. They can handle $100 loss going into the next one. They are much better equipped to do so.
Okay i will try and put this another way you can compare PS4 to PS2 or even PS3 in terms of tech on cost saving since things are different.
One of the big things that effect cost is node shrinks where a lot of saving used to come from .
Right now we are hitting the end of that and things are becoming more expensive to get done .
Another thing is PS4 has way more parts in it than PS2 or PS3 for eg the ram chips which add to the BOM .
You can't look at PS2 and said oh they get it done with that so they can do it with PS4 since thing are very different now tech wise.
This is crazy talk. the PS3 was drastically more expensive to build than any system before or since. The PS4 is cheaper to construct and always has been. it does not have "more parts" than the PS3 to drive the cost up- the Cell was a ridiculously complex piece of tech, especially for 2006. The Jaguar is a low cost laptop processor. The PS3 had an expensive RAMBUS/XDR split ram setup- the PS4 uses a single pool of GDDR5.
It doesn't appear you're listening to anything I'm saying, so I'm moving on from this discussion with you.
That drop of the Wii in the graph, lost all that crazy momentum... is still the fastest that have reach the 95m, really impressive.
Some of those factors weigh more than others but sure.
I would say Sony's strength does more for them than MS messing up. The former is what makes 100M+ possible in the first place.
I am listening to what you are saying but you seem to have no idea on how hardware cost reduction is done .
You think Sony can sell PS4 for $99 and even if they sell it at a lost they can make it up with other things without even knowing how much that lost would even be .
Also revenue is not profit stop using that as a base for anything .
Sony made billion in revenue with PS3 but lost billions of dollars on it .
EDIT just saw your next post and you looking at wrong things when it comes to lower the BOM of the console .
It don't matter if Jaguar is a low cost laptop cpu what matters is the node shrink to make the APU cheaper is becoming more expensive to do .
Last edited:
What does it say about the other consoles then? ;)
And of course you're downplaying it, that exactly the definition of the word lol
"Sony only succeeding because their competitors fucked up" is revisionist history that doesn't make any sense.
The Saturn and N64 were both solid systems with a lot of good games on them (you could argue the 3D0 and Jaguar were not, however). Sony just managed to put together an ecosystem that SEGA and Nintendo could not compete with. Their supply chain meant that they were able to build a system far more cheaply than SEGA was, and sticking to CDs (on which they owned the patent) meant third parties could produce far more games far more cheaply than they could on a cart based system so they dominated the market. Nintendo didn't have any choice but to stick with Carts- otherwise they would have been in the same position SEGA was with the Saturn- losing huge amounts of money on a CD based system more expensive than Sony's.
The DC was bleeding money due to SEGA being badly managed- but Microsoft and Nintendo made virtually no mistakes with the XBOX and Gamecube. Both were competitively priced, significantly stronger systems with good first and third party support. it didn't matter. Sony obliterated them anyway. There was no competing with the brand strength of the PS2.
Sony on the other hand made every mistake possible with the PS3. It was drastically more expensive than the competition, launched a year late, had poor third party title performance, and a substantially worse online network that had a highly publicized hack that took it out for a month. It didn't matter. They outsold Microsoft AGAIN and only barely came in second behind the most popular nintendo console ever made.
To be fair, PS4 released in a more competitive market and did not have the dvd novelty. Anyways with subscriptions and psn digital sales, it is already a way more profitable generation for them.
In terms of videogames, the PlayStation 2 era was supposed to be more competitive. The PlayStation 4 launched against the failed Wii U and the terribly received Xbox One presentation. The PlayStation 2 pre-launch period was filled with a big console war vibe about the DreamCast, the GameCube and the Xbox. In hindsight, they are huge failures. In terms of actual market reception, Sony blew them out of the water with excellent marketing to kill the DreamCast and an incredible incredible first year that included Metal Gear Solid 2, Final Fantasy X, Gran Turismo 3 and Grand Theft Auto 3 alongside many many more hits to make sure the others had no chance before they even launched. It simply feels less impressive to me. Arrogant Sony declaring the console war over after barely a year was such a memorable move.
Indeed, I agree with you.
Firstly I didn't say what you put in your inverted commas. Read my entire post again. I'll repeat: I said they had it easy in terms of one single factor (ie competitor's fuck-ups), not that they had it easy to sell 100m units, I was not implying that was their only reason for success - which, quite frankly, would be ridiculous when we're talking about a platform holder that has done more to expand and grow the market than any other.
Secondly, your post is full of contradictions. You can't in one sentence say that Sony made every mistake possible with the PS4 and cite it launching later, the launch price, third party performance etc, and then also say Microsoft and Nintendo made virtually no mistakes with OG Xbox and Gamecube. That itself would be revisionist history.
OG Xbox and Gamecube launched 18 months after PS2. Both had abysmal third party support in the grand scheme of things as a result - so many major games were defacto PS2 exclusives as a result, from the likes of Final Fantasy to Devil May Cry. Even GTA3/VC/SA didn't come to Xbox for a long time after their respective launches. OG Xbox also launched in Europe at £100 more expensive than PS2 was at the time. Microsoft then had to scramble to try and reduce the price and make huge losses just to try and compete.
Of course: PS2 was a gigantic success because of... PS2 itself. Sony had built up a strong brand and truly global leadership position with PS1 through working hard and smart and looking to expand the market rather than just going after Sega and Nintendo's scraps. They had built a platform which worked truly in partnership with third parties. They had built the console at an attractive price, with internal redesigns to lower the price further as the generation progressed, and also the Slimline. They had a consistent, strong and diverse first party output. They had strong marketing with a clear message. They expanded their market demographic in Europe via Eyetoy, Buzz and Singstar. They did everything right. But of course it also helped that the competition didn't do everything right, and everything the competition did do was 18 months late. That's all I'm saying. There are multiple factors.
... Have you looked into the history of gaming? Marketing, price, Branding and so on. If you look from a neutral business perspective you can see that Playstation is a big brand when it comes to gaming. You have to look at how much other consoles support their system and the commercials they made and to whom they aimed.
Sony KNEW what gaming COULD become since day one so they marketed it like that from day one.
Are we sure about that? So it won't reach the 100 mark?
PS3 was expensive we all know that so it was no surprise that it never did reach the 100mark. Heck can't remember it was ever officially under the 200?
I hope MS and Nintendo come out swinging next gen so if PS5 does end up dominating, there'll be no more avenues* to say 'they just got lucky!' and they might actually get some credit for doing it right, because it's one of the most shitty and disingenuous arguments I've ever seen.
* But of course, life will find a way.
* But of course, life will find a way.
OP
OP
Imagine you have an incredibly successful product that can only be beaten by another of your products.
With one holiday season without next gen consoles and Death Stranding and Last of Us still to come, I can see Ps4 reaching 120 mil before Next gen arrive and afterwards I could see it further increasing to 130mil over the years.
Pretty beasty.
Pretty beasty.
It is not that uncommon, the only console ever to beat the PlayStation 1 so far was the PlayStation 2. It is more impressive to look at the 'failure' of that brand. Imagine an handheld that is considered a failure as it got outsold almost 2:1 by its only competitor. Now realize that handheld is likely the second best selling handheld ever if you split the sales of the Game Boy and the Color. That is what happened to the PSP.
I posted this in another thread where the narrative was the "competition":
Basically without realizing it they're saying Sony has it easy because their competition is Microsoft and Nintendo, while Microsoft and Nintendo have it hard because their competition is Sony.
What I mean was that I'm not taking away that it is an achievement in its own right, just that it isn't as big of an achievement as many claim it to be. That's why I said I'm not downplaying that it's an achievement". They are the most popular console as gaming is more popular than it has ever been. It should be selling more than any has. It is an achievement to be doing so, (it's a hell of an achievement to be the most popular with the competition that's out there), but the fact that it's the fastest selling and not by a large margin isn't really surprising to me.
Switched to PS4 having owned the Xbox One since launch.
Microsoft made a colossal fuck-up betting the bank on Kinect, but they have definitely turned it around.
Will be a very interesting next-generation, although the software is still clearly with Sony.
Microsoft made a colossal fuck-up betting the bank on Kinect, but they have definitely turned it around.
Will be a very interesting next-generation, although the software is still clearly with Sony.
It did it at $299 price, with only two or three price cut for a week or less, while PS2 and Wii were at $149 to $199.
OP
OP
We have people saying that video game is it's prime today, everyone is playing more
At the same time we have people saying that the numbers of home consoles are much smaller than last gen
And each one uses to confirm theirs narratives
I would say that yes, more people seem to enjoy video games, but that doesn't mean it is easy to sell consoles.
At the same time we have people saying that the numbers of home consoles are much smaller than last gen
And each one uses to confirm theirs narratives
I would say that yes, more people seem to enjoy video games, but that doesn't mean it is easy to sell consoles.
OP
OP
And for that reason people thought wiiu would have an amazing line up at launch and first years
I wouldn't say "everything" right - but yes, they've done a lot of good/course correction from the PS3 launch. This momentum has been going ever since the PSN debacle was fixed.
What you don't understand is that the achievement is not selling 100M while being the most popular console by a large margin, but getting to be the most popular console in the first, place reaching that position....specially coming from the disastre that last gen was. That's the HUGE achievement.
So stop downplaying it
I literally said that in the piece you quoted. "It's a hell of an achievement to be the most popular with the competition that's out there"
You can say "What I'm gonna say is not x y or z , but...." and follow up by literally saying " x , y or z"
You are saying "What I'm gonna say is not to downplay this huge achievement, but ..." followed by a string of downplaying comments.
If you don't wanna downplay it, it's simple, don't post downplaying arguments/statements.
And if you do don't be surprised people are calling you out on them
Wait. So now 100 million was only possible because of some other publishers missteps? That doesn't make any factual based sense.
Anyone pushing that narrative isn't doing so in good faith.
Anyone pushing that narrative isn't doing so in good faith.
I said in a previous post, I'm not downplaying that it is an achievement. I'm downplaying the significance of said achievement. There is much more significance in the PS4 being the top dog this gen than there is it selling 100 million in the timeframe that it did. That is all.
"Look man, I'm not gonna downplay this fantastic victory by your college team, but you know the other teams suck, didnt you.? Plus the referees were all bought. Just saying. And of course there's the doping rumours on 4chan. Not to downplay it or anything..."
