-
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.
PS4 sell through at 91.6 million as of Dec 31st 2018. Spider-Man sell through over 9 million. (Sony PR)
- Thread starter Guymelef
- Start date
Went after? Huh? That's not going after.
And I did follow up. Read the thread. Jeez
The PS4 sold out immediately at $199 this black friday. People were going crazy over those spidey bundles and they were quickly impossible to find.
edit: remember this infamous photo:
That kind of ridiculousness isn't perfectly indicative of demand when MSRP reaches those levels, though. That picture was scalpers looking to flip the product at a $50-75 profit each when price returned to normal.
I agree. Same OS, but upgraded features and UI.
Technically, all PS4 games are apps so if Sony is going after PS4 BC with the PS5, the non-game apps should also work across both.
Man you really have an axe to grind with me huh, cause I've called you out? It's time to either stop reaching or stop posting.
How can you not see how engineering PowerPC games to run on x86 hardware is NOT the same as what is extremely likely to be running x86 games on x86 hardware? I think you know that all Xbox 360 games require a lot of work because the Xbox One's 360 solution doesn't just run the games as they are. They are recompiled versions that need to be tested, and approved by devs/publishers so that they run well enough on new hardware.
Unless you think Sony is going to need to emulate a PPC OS (which they won't), PS5 directly emulating PS4 games is likely a different story to how the XB1 solution allows you to download and play a freshly recompiled and certified version of an XB360 game. Like we've seen with the mid-gen upgrades, it should be rather simple to boot up and run PS4 games on a PS5 (and the same scenario from XB1 -> Nextbox). Do you honestly see PS5/Nextbox being drastically different architecture?
Plus, I never said that Sony couldn't or won't charge money for dedicated upgrades, did I? My view was that with BC, Sony won't need to market and release a proper remaster... not that a patch for existing titles is out of the question. If you've been paying attention this generation, you'll notice that Sony has supported far fewer remasters than they did on PS3, and outside of The Last of Us Remastered, almost none of them have been big successes. They can let people buy any PS4 game to play on PS5, and provide an optional upgrade to let users take advantage of the next-gen hardware. That would be a great incentive.
I believe the XB1X has 16xAF at a system-level and unlocked frame rates that run higher on BC and current-gen games, so I expect improvements to games at a system-level like that on PS5. That is not a LOL-worthy prediction unless you think how the X does it is laughable.
Is there any other game than Bloodborne (as others have mentioned, is not even a valid example) to base this on? Not a very convincing argument.
Last edited:
The PS2 as a DVD player narrative in kinda overblown.
For the JP launch? Very true. JP went crazy over it. The US launch? Mostly true. DVD players existed at the same price point or lower...199 to 249 was the budget price point.
AFTER that? Hell no.
DVD player prices cratered fast. I was seeing holiday pricing on DVD players at $99 as early as 2001.
The ps2 was also a horrendous DVD player. The dualshock 2 was not only a terrible remote but also wired with a short cord, and the ps2 didn't upscale to 480p. The thing was a nightmare as your primary or secondary DVD player even if you ignored DISC READ ERROR.
by 2006 when the Ps3 launched it was crazy outmoded. No one was buying it for that. And it still sold 55m+ units after 2006.
I really don't think the UI will change much/at all between PS4 and PS5. PlayStation is going to be 1 unified architecture hardware/software going forward. Difference being only how well games run and some titles requiring a PS5.
This is so developers don't have to worry about supporting a "PS4" version of their game/app and a PS5 version– it'll be the same version running on both (much like how iOS works).
Also, why I think "PS4" will sell more over time than PS2– generational lines will continue to blur.
I hope not, that would be so boringggg. There are so many improvements I'd like to see on PS4's UI (such as having a grid interface for games in folders), but with 6.0 being very underwhelming I don't see Sony focusing much on exciting new firmware for the rest of the gen, and more on the games. I see what you mean though. It wouldn't surprise me if that approach appeals to Sony for not having to put extra effort into making things look fresh for a new device, especially if it makes things easier for developers as well.
At some point though, I think trying to balance feature parity on both devices will start to become a pain in the ass, and given that the OS footprint for PS5 is likely to be much greater they wouldn't be able to add stressful features on both, if it slows down the performance on PS4. Either way, I'd hope they're planning some cool upgrades for the current UI in time for PS5.
Last edited:
Thanks for all of your replies, you guys make me think it's actually possible for PS4 to actually match or even outsell PS2.
Interesting numbers BTW!
I think PS4 will surpass 130M.
2019 - 16M (107.6M) - 2M
2020 - 12M (118.6M) - 4M
2021 - 09M (127.6M) - 3M
2022 - 06M (133.6M) - 3M
2023 - 03M (136.6M) - 3M
2019 - 16M (107.6M) - 2M
2020 - 12M (118.6M) - 4M
2021 - 09M (127.6M) - 3M
2022 - 06M (133.6M) - 3M
2023 - 03M (136.6M) - 3M
In a few years I think we'll have to ask ourselves whats considered a "PS4"? I think we'll see another hardware rev that's even smaller, cheaper etc. I think it's also possible we'll see a smaller/cheaper/quieter PS4 Pro. I really think they're going the mobile model here with multiple systems that run the same software. If you want to play the new shiny software at 4k60, you have to get the PS5. But if you're ok with 1080p30 you can stick w/ the Pro. 900p30 on the base system. Some games will require a PS5.
I'm thinking this as well and wouldn't be surprised if it's close to 140M when everything is said and done. It's an absolute juggernaut of a console and the PS5 will just sell itself out of the gate if it's remotely decent because of the goodwill. Unlike the jump from the PS3 to 4, I won't be in a hurry to switch even with BC and I'm sure many gamers will also wait it out and opt for a cheap PS4 so it should last until ~2023-24.
I was saying Spidey is their most successful game by a significant margin given the time between now and its release.
Actually 101.63 to 102.49 but sure you can 'round' it to 101 vs 105 if you like.
To answer the question of who sold the most in 2018, i decided to look up numbers, seems that since the start of 2018 to end of Q3 2018 nintendo shipped 8 million units, and sony now said they sold through 18m consoles in 2018.... so unless if nintendo sold like 12 million consoles just in Q4 (we are talking about shipped vs sold, having shipped 8m consoles means they probably sold somewhat less than that), i think ps4 still sold more than the switch in 2018.
Gotcha.
It didn't read in the affirmative, hence why I was confused.
Maybe not 60 million but it's gonna sell another 30 at least. 15 or more this year and another 15 next year. That should put them around 120 million.
After 2020, they'll probably drop to single digit years. I'm guessing 8 million 2021 and 6-7 million 2022. That should put them in the area of 134 million. If they drop the price to $199, these numbers could slightly increase.
That's my take on it anyway.
IGN just had a video yesterday and said Wii at 101m and PSX at 102m.
PS1 sold more than Wii... anyways I don't doubt that PS4 will surpass both to become 2nd highest selling console ever
I get those numbers from Sony and Nintendo.
They are the official final shipment numbers from Sony and Nintendo
I asume you've used some chartz, and even then rounded Wii down and PS1 up lol.
Edit:
https://web.archive.org/web/20120609161621/http://scei.co.jp/corporate/data/bizdataps_e.html
https://www.nintendo.co.jp/ir/en/finance/hard_soft/index.html
They haven't officially retired it, but they aren't producing it anymore.
These things are just found on WIkipedia with their sources:
https://web.archive.org/web/20110524023857/http://www.scei.co.jp/corporate/data/bizdataps_e.html
https://www.nintendo.co.jp/ir/finance/historical_data/xls/consolidated_sales_e1703.xlsx
I think PlayStation 5 launch will affect PlayStation 4 sales more than that. Something like:
2019 - 16M
2020 - 8M (PS5 in early 2020) / 10M (late 2020) / 12M (early 2021).
2021 - 4/6M
2022 - <3M
good, nintendo numbers seems really up to date but sony report is no longer updated since 10 years now sadly
It is a webarchive page from 10 years ago. Sony's current reporting can be found here:
https://www.sie.com/en/corporate/data.html
But it is worthless since they wanted to hide the terrible PS3 performance and they never fixed that once the PS3 turned around.
Time to start a new thread "Prediction: How many PS4 will be sold by the end of 2019"
My prediction: They hit 100 million sold by June/July after holiday season 2019 they easily hit 110 or 116 million before PS5 gets revealed early 2020.
My prediction: They hit 100 million sold by June/July after holiday season 2019 they easily hit 110 or 116 million before PS5 gets revealed early 2020.
If you read the page, PS1 sold nothing from March 2005. It was officially discontinued in March 2006.
It is the final total for PS1.
PS3 never really 'turned it around' they just doubled down on the massive losses and helped it sell mediocre for a long time.
See here for the best figures we have:
https://www.resetera.com/threads/is-there-a-trend-of-3rd-consoles-failing.65920/page-3#post-12211572
"Sell mediocre" how is releasing a year late with a $599 price and still managing to sell +80 million and reaching competition is mediocre exactly? On units alone PS3's performance was great.
In units, yes. But it had been generating losses for how long? Four consecutive years? I'm not sure whether this is only consoles+digital or retail discs as well - maybe somebody could clarify?
There are four consoles that have sold more than the PlayStation 3. It is just that three of them are named PlayStation, and the fourth was its competitor.
Hardware-only.
Sorry, bad wording. What I meant was that hardware losses were so huge that they had to sell a lot of games to get even. No mentioning being in the black. We had this chart showing PlayStation division revenue since PS1 but I can't find it...
Ah this thing: yeah, that was the loss of the entire division. But that would include R&D and things like that as well.
I said wow. Really puts things into perspective. Congrats to Sony and Insomniac on the success
The ps3 generating huge losses was planned from the beginning. Sony took a gamble that taking a bath on it to push Blu Ray and the Cell processor would pay off in the long run.
Blu Ray succeeded as the only disc based HD format, but Sony didnt see the rise of streaming services just decimating the market for physical discs.
The Cell never panned out at all as a general purpose device. That thing was never intended to be a ps3 only processor- it was substantially more capable than the 360 processor, and is even stronger than the cpu in the ps4 despite hitting the market 7 years earlier. A less ambitious CPU and a more traditional GPU would have made a cheaper, easier to work with console.
On top of those two things, there was a dispute with Nvidia who made the RSX and refused to lower costs on it, ensuring that the ps4 remained very costly to produce late into its lifespan.
All of these things contributed to the losses of the ps3, but none really reflect poorly on it as a gaming device. It was almost all non gaming business decisions that caused it.
By any metric, 85 million or whatever it was the PS3 ended up selling is a phenomenal achievement. The 360 only managed to "about tie" it despite an extra year on the market, equivalent performance and a way lower price point. No other home console system not named "playstation" or "wii" outsold it, and two of those werent by much.
Finally, we can't overlook that the way Sony continued to support the ps3 with great software well into the twilight years of that system while nintendo and MS were experiencing software droughts had a lot to do with the high amount of goodwill the ps4 received at launch. Sony had proven with the ps3 that they were still hyper focused on quality games for their base even in the worst of circumstances.
Last edited:
Mediocre is probably a bit harsh, but certainly middling or 'just decent'. Especially in a generation where 500 million consoles were sold, its market share was very low.
Its best year was 14 million sold.
PS2 had SIX better years than PS3's best year.
DS sold over 30 million two years in a row, and had five years higher than PS3's best year.
Wii had four years higher than PS3's best year.
PS3 and 360's final totals benefited a lot from 1) the generation's home console winner dropping off a cliff due to no third party support to carry its tail as first party shifted to next gen (completely unique for any generational winner) and 2) a Microsoft/Sony cold war at the end of the generation. Both delayed their next consoles to try and recoup some of their losses and so PS360 had 2-3 extra years without a new generation. No other consoles in history have been on the market without a new competitor for so long, even the stillborn Wii U was 2012, 6/7 years after the PS3/360, and it was 7/8 years between PS360 and PS4Bone, unheard of lengths.
As such, it had seven years as the latest Playstation. PS3 sold from crap to 'okay', but over an elongated period.
And by official figures the 360 outsold the PS3, the closest we have to final totals is 83.8M PS3 to 84M 360. Anything else is guesses, not data.
PS3 lost possibly as much as ten billion dollars. Nobody plans for that.
Yes they did, it was poorly designed as a console, they rushed in a GPU because Cell wasn't enough, and it ended up it cost more 99% of games looked worse than on the cheaper 360.
No, Game Boy and DS also sold much more. And GBA and 3DS are damn close too, and all four made buckets of money instead of losing billions (same with PSP too most likely which also got close).
And by official figures the 360 outsold the PS3, the closest we have to final totals is 83.8M PS3 to 84M 360. Anything else is guesses, not data.
This was indeed smart and set them up to have some momentum that continued with the PS4, and when Microsoft and Nintendo both royally screwed up they ended up cleaning up.
But that has nothing to do with losses, the PS3 was a disaster they literally bought themselves halfway out of. In the largest (500 million consoles sold) most profitable (Nintendo made 6 billion in profit in a single year) generation in history, Sony, coming off the most successful console of all time, lost every territory and lost billions of dollars, and by official figures came fourth in the generation, behind DS, Wii and 360. PS3 had ~16% market share of its generation. PS2 had ~55%.
I guess you could say some of the sustained PS3 losses were in service of building an audience, no matter the cost, to set up the PS4 better. Which was a smart move because PS4 will possibly become the most profitable console in history, beating out the Wii.
Last edited:
I said wow. Really puts things into perspective. Congrats to Sony and Insomniac on the success
I would say it's not all Spiderman that helped take it from 70 million to 90. God of war did good numbers in console sales that I believe they made a forcast later in the summer saying they had 86 Million units sold.
Yeah since God of War they have been on a roll this year.
Right, my bad.
Anyways point is, the top 3 best selling consoles of all time are going to end up all being Playstations. Which is kind of crazy since they only released 4 consoles. With the exception of the PSWii60 gen they've basically dominated the market since the 1990s.
Any idea where Xbox one is? Ended 2017 around 34 million.
This year in us before December is around 3 million right? Us probably counts 60% for them so before December around 5 million this year?
This year in us before December is around 3 million right? Us probably counts 60% for them so before December around 5 million this year?
This is disingenous. The PS2 didn't launch at the equivalent of $750. The PS3 was NEVER going to hit PS2 level sales and Sony knew this when launching it. It was simply too expensive with far more competition than the PS2 had. Sony knew this, and saying that "Well, the PS2 had six better years than the PS3's" means nothing. The PS2 sold 50 million more units than the most similar system to it. Nothing has come close to selling what that thing did, with the possible exception of the PS4- but that remains to be seen.
I'm going to stop you right here pal. Home consoles and Handhelds do not have similar business models AT ALL. Handhelds sell one per person, not one per household. This is why handheld tie ratios for software are nowhere NEAR console tie ratios- the business model is different. The DS despite it's unit sales being close to the PS2 got blown out of the water by the PS2's software sales- 1.6 Billion units of software sold vs. less than 900m. the two aren't close at all.
You know what else outsold the DS handily in software for the platform? The PS3, at about 970 million units of software. PS3 software also outsold the Wii (960m units) despite selling fewer systems, and easily outclassed every gameboy ever- the original Gameboy by almost double (500m) and the GBA by almost TRIPLE (377m).
Profits come from software, not console hardware, So if you're going to talk about "failures" and "mediocre sales" the PS3 isn't in the conversation. It destroys every system Nintendo ever made in terms of software sold. The only things that outsold it were the 360 and the PS2.
Finally, Handhelds are also SUBSTANTIALLY cheaper. The 2DS was selling for $80 at one point. Nearly half the price of the PS3 at it's cheapest point. The PS3 was not competing with the DS, Game Boy, or 3DS and pointing to DS sales as to why the PS3 had "mediocre" sales of 85 million or so is wildly off base. Handhelds and home consoles have wildly different business markets, price points, tie ratios, and audiences. What makes one successful would not have worked for the other, and any home console platform with the hardware sales but software tie ratio of Nintendo's most successful handheld ever (to say nothing about lesser selling systems such as the 3DS) would have been a failure.
The PS3 had plenty of third party support after the PS4 launched. I'm not sure what you're getting at here. Cross gen ports and sports titles continued well into 2017 for that system. And that's on disc. Digital only titles for PS3 weren't in short supply either.
The PS3 launched in 2006. The PS4 launched in 2013. That's 7 years. "longest in history" is a nice way of saying it was one year longer than the 16 bit era (the genesis/MD launched in 1988, the Saturn- the first RELEVANT 32 bit console didn't show up until 1994), and exactly as long as the generation following the 32 bit era. The Dreamcast Launched in 1998. We didn't see a "next generation" system well past it until the Xbox 360 launched in 2005. 7 years.
The PS3 had the shortest production lifespan of all of the Playstation Consoles not named Vita. The PS1 had a 12 year production period, the PS2 had a 13 year production period. The PS3 was only produced for ten before Sony EOL'ed it.
no one has official final figures for either console. That's why most people say the systems were approximately tied. There's no way to say which one was ahead, especially when you consider the PS3 outsold the 360 globally every single year they were on the market.
This may be hard for you to comprehend, but the PS3 losing all of that money was the plan from the start. Had Blu-Ray succeeded to the extent DVD did, and Cell taken off as a general purpose competitor to Intel AS WAS THE PLAN FOR THAT, ten billion in losses would have been trivial compared to what Sony/Toshiba/IBM would have made on Royalties.
THAT is why Blu-Ray was in the PS3, and THAT is why the Cell was in the PS3 despite being an expensive, complicated option. Sony chose to cannibalize their console market share to push new tech. It worked for one, and did not for the other- but Blu Ray's success was meaningless when the bottom fell out of the physical distribution market.
That's a bizarre take. The PS3 as a console was rock solid with excellent performance, and titles made for it in mind outperformed the 360 easily. The issue was difficulty programming the cell, not the capability of the console.
Last edited:
So? We're comparing console sales, not 'taking into account all circumstances and making excuses as to why one didn't sell as much.'
Again, making up new rules as you go along. We are talking hardware sales.
Wow. You truly have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.
"Profits come from software, not console hardware"
THE PS3 IS THE LEAST PROFITABLE CONSOLE OF ANY TYPE IN HISTORY AND THAT INCLUDES SOFTWARE SALES.
Are you even looking at your own arguments?
Read this post
https://www.resetera.com/threads/is-there-a-trend-of-3rd-consoles-failing.65920/page-2#post-12165139
If you want to make it about profit, fine. Then PS3 loses every single possible metric. It's the biggest money loser of all time, by far.
I think it will last for another year, that the drop won't be that dramatic due to price drop and being able to sell it in emerging markets and to families. Im addition to this I'd add another million to 2019 and 2020 since I think PS5 won't be released until Nov. 2020.
I think it will sell around 140 million.
If with PS5 they improve PS Now adding important countries that now aren't covered (like some European ones like Spain) and supporting PS5 games on PS4 through PS Now and make PS5 full BC that would help PS4 last longer, because non-high end games like indies could be released as PS4 games to get extra sales. If this happens it may reach around 145-155 million.
Could you please elaborate on those 500m consoles? Just curious. Are handhelds counted? Regarding home-consoles the
market share wasn't thaaat bad (80m 360, 80m PS3, 100m Wii = 260m) ...not counting the roughly 50m PS2s that were sold between late 2005 and 2012. What I'm trying to say, if you put PS2 sales in the context of all consoles sold between 2000 and late 2005, the market-share will also look much lower than some might expect:
PS2 100m+ appr. 50m Gamecube + Xbox + some pennies from Dreamcast ~ 70% (out o' my ass). Now put that in context with
the 100m-150m+ (rough estimate) handhelds Nintendo sold in that timeframe and you'll end up around above 30% but below 50%
Nah, I'm talking about consoles. Maybe the switch doesn't count as a console but a portable.
Switch is unique. The price is more home console like but the form factor / value proposition is totally new. Pretty hard to fit the Switch in one category.