• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

ELDEN RING is the best selling title of February 2022 and the best selling game of 2022 so far in the US

KellyM

Member
I'd be surprised if the US isn't just as high or higher, but nobody has offered any info as to the accuracy of that.
Well, one of my family members who owns an x-box purchased Elder Rings physically and not digitally. So i suspect it sold well physically in the USA . which I am from.
 

Ozriel

Member
once again, its very telling how hard xbox fans are working to spin a narrative that GT7 or Horizon did anywhere near bad because of Elden Ring. Especially given how close Sony and Fromsoftware are and their history on playstation platforms.

This narrative can only come back to bite them in the ass

Why don’t you directly call out folks who are making these silly statements instead of constantly whingeing about ‘xbox fans’?

The Land Of Make Believe Wow GIF

Imagine you rightly calling out folks for silly fanboyism in this thread…then you go ahead and join their ranks by posting this 😀
 

Three

Member
No I meant the platform split.
I haven only seen information for UK.
Oh, no it's not based on the UK split but it's not far off in the US from the UK anyhow. Game sales on xbox are just generally lower and before any xbox fans get triggered you can get a feel for this by looking at the xbox only charts, the games charting high there do not show up on the multiplatform 20 charts showing that the numbers are low there without even having to disclose them:


 

Three

Member
We only know breakdown of the UK numbers and it's 42% on PS consoles and 32% on Xbox consoles, in a region where the PS consoles have a lot more of an installed userbase. The game is selling respectably fine on both. 10% difference in sales is meaningless, you'd think the PS consoles would have 50~60% of sales if where the franchise started mattered in that kind of a thing.
Where are you getting these numbers from?

It's 41% PS and 29% xbox


This means an approx 60% PS vs 40% xbox split.
 
Last edited:

Dolodolo

Member
Franky what does performance have anything to do with sales lol.

We only know breakdown of the UK numbers and it's 42% on PS consoles and 32% on Xbox consoles, in a region where the PS consoles have a lot more of an installed userbase. The game is selling respectably fine on both. 10% difference in sales is meaningless, you'd think the PS consoles would have 50~60% of sales if where the franchise started mattered in that kind of a thing.
Much more installed base?
You are aware that the UK is literally the only country in Europe where the ratio of Xbox to Ps sales is relatively close. This is a historical fact.
Just like USA
 

reksveks

Member
Much more installed base?
You are aware that the UK is literally the only country in Europe where the ratio of Xbox to Ps sales is relatively close. This is a historical fact.
Just like USA

I suspect that ratio is roughly in-line with next gen consoles (~1.5:1) but probably whats more important is how many of the early xbox one buyers stayed with the platform. I think the Non-GP game sales are still in-line with console units.
 

DenchDeckard

Gold Member
whats crazy is, even with Gamepass the splits in games sales are about the same as when game pass wasn't around. It's kind of proving that Microsoft have just created an extra revenue stream and xbox owners are still buying the same amount of games at release if they are interested in the game. Its healthy to see.

I'm very happy with Elden rings success its much deserved and will hopefully win over a whole new addition of new players that learn to love the FromSoft design. Yes it is tough but they can adventure and level up and hopefully find the joy in taking down that twat of a boss!
 

Csr

Member
8 million seems like a more realistic high-end than the 10 million or 14 million that was being put out there, I can believe that. Could also potentially mean the game's reach 20 million across all platforms already, which is quite insane to think about.

Curious what type of pressures this will put on the team for the inevitable sequel five years down the line. Does SteamDB have a publication date for reviews? I don't read reviews there that often so I'm curious.

I don't think they have a chart for reviews like they have for other stats.

Oh, no it's not based on the UK split but it's not far off in the US from the UK anyhow. Game sales on xbox are just generally lower and before any xbox fans get triggered you can get a feel for this by looking at the xbox only charts, the games charting high there do not show up on the multiplatform 20 charts showing that the numbers are low there without even having to disclose them:

I don't doubt the PS version outsold the Xbox it's just that both the Steam ccu and review numbers are crazy high and I was curious about the PS-Steam comparison globally.
 

Three

Member
I don't doubt the PS version outsold the Xbox it's just that both the Steam ccu and review numbers are crazy high and I was curious about the PS-Steam comparison globally.
I see, I'm not sure about global steam vs PS to be honest. Places like China, Germany, and some other countries might make it pretty close overall. In the US though I think it's safe to assume that it followed the trend of major releases selling more on PS.
 

reksveks

Member

1. Elden Ring (PS5) -> 26.800 / New
2. Elden Ring (PS4) -> 17.850 / New
3. Elden Ring (Xbox) -> 8.700 / New
4. Elden Ring (PC) -> 6.850 / New
83% PS vs 17% xbox split
Always good to put this in context that this is a physical sales ratio.

It would be interesting to plot sales ratios with console (with disc drives) ratio across markets.

For more context here.

Number of PS5(including Digital ones) - 340920
Number of XBS - 101370 (roughly 62.88% of those are Series S so 65k Series S and 36.4k Series X)

Sadly don't get enough data from Vandals on the Sony PS5 splits, 15% is typically want we have seen for the DE version globally.
 
Last edited:

adamsapple

Gold Member
Much more installed base?
You are aware that the UK is literally the only country in Europe where the ratio of Xbox to Ps sales is relatively close. This is a historical fact.
Just like USA


Yes, it sounds like you're agreeing with me .


Did the maths of week 1+2, Chris's tweet on the 3rd was just week one.

Also saw that adamsapple adamsapple number in his comment was week 2 results.

Thanks for clarifying before I could reply.
 

reksveks

Member
Previous Fromsoftware game if I am not forgetting anything


01 (NE) PS4 Sekiro: Shadows Die Twice - 14,000 / NEW
02 (01) PS4 Tom Clancy's The Division 2 - 2,600 / 9,700
03 (RE) PS4 FIFA 19 - 2,200 / 616,000
04 (05) PS4 Red Dead Redemption 2 - 1,800 / 398,800
05 (NE) PC Sekiro: Shadows Die Twice - 1,750 / NEW
06 (NE) XBO Sekiro: Shadows Die Twice - 1,600 / NEW
07 (RE) PS4 Kingdom Hearts HD 1.5 + 2.5 Remix - 1,500 / 52,000
08 (RE) PS4 Grand Theft Auto V - 1,400 / 909,000
09 (RE) PS4 Assassin's Creed Odyssey - 1,300 / 104,000
10 (RE) NSW New Super Mario Bros. Deluxe - 1,250 / 38,000
 

John Wick

Member
Xbox took february with Horizon and Gran turismo coming out?

SOnys chip shortages must be in dire levels to not have hardware for the month of those releases.

Also, Elden Ring kicking ass in the US too with one week less sales than horizon. Booyakashai From Software, good for you.
You do realise PS is more than just USA and UK? They have to share their supply more.
 

Holammer

Member
Game must have some solid hype surrounding it, a friend of mine just bought it and he never touched a Souls-like title ever.
Knowing his usual taste, I haven't "sold" or evangelized it at all, so it's somehow reaching people outside the bubble.
 

Ozriel

Member
Oh, no it's not based on the UK split but it's not far off in the US from the UK anyhow. Game sales on xbox are just generally lower and before any xbox fans get triggered you can get a feel for this by looking at the xbox only charts, the games charting high there do not show up on the multiplatform 20 charts showing that the numbers are low there without even having to disclose them:



I’m not sure how this means that games sales on Xbox are lower, as a rule of thumb.
Many of the games charting in the Xbox list are pushed down in the combined list due to first party exclusives on PS and Switch.

That chart isn’t going to tell you if Far Cry 6 has a higher attach ratio on PS vs Xbox, for example.

I could be wrong, of course.
 
Last edited:

Fake

Member
Sony fans salty? Wtf are you going on about? The souls formula started on PS platform. ER has probably sold best on PS.

Are you replying everyone in this thread at row and asking me that?

I not the one console warring between sales of Playstation vs Xbox here.

I'm happy about ER sales, whatever the plataform he is selling.
 

SSfox

Lies about why mods reply ban and warn me.
There's been a bit of starvation of Japanese games recently, so this game + GT7 are really a great thing to happen specially now. The more great japanese games, the better for sure.
 
Last edited:

Fake

Member
They’re trying to push a narrative that makes no sense.

I not trying to push any narrative. I don't care about who sold more, whatever Playstation sales or Xbox sales. Just stop this console war nonsense and celebrate the game sales.

Hypocrisy coming from those who were previous banned precisely for console warring. I guess people here really ignore the pinned thread.
 
Last edited:
whats crazy is, even with Gamepass the splits in games sales are about the same as when game pass wasn't around. It's kind of proving that Microsoft have just created an extra revenue stream and xbox owners are still buying the same amount of games at release if they are interested in the game. Its healthy to see.

Hmm, I think this is actually VERY situational. Elden Ring was not available on GamePass and I doubt it'll be for a long while if ever, so if people on Xbox wanted to play it, they had to buy it out of necessity. Elden Ring happens to be one of the few AAA releases big enough to get just about everyone out there buying it.

For comparison, AFAIK Tunic is coming out soon and won't be on GamePass, and I've seen more than a few Xbox channels talk about the game struggling or even people there more tepid to go out and buy it, because it's not on GamePass. So outside of very large AAA games it's still debatable whether GamePass conditions a good portion of people to be inclined towards playing smaller games through the service versus buying them in the store, even if they had a cheap price ($30, $40). We don't have enough data to show that.

I'm very happy with Elden rings success its much deserved and will hopefully win over a whole new addition of new players that learn to love the FromSoft design. Yes it is tough but they can adventure and level up and hopefully find the joy in taking down that twat of a boss!

TBH from the footage I've seen so far (trying not to watch too much stuff beyond the first quarter of the game tho for spoiler reasons), it doesn't...look that hard? Just an outsider looking in talking here, but between lack of fall damage, OP rolling, a permanent horse summon and the fact you can cheese the flasks to get an OP version of that almost from the start of the game, it actually looks to be the easiest Souls game and I don't think I could say it looks too difficult outside of knowing where to go, when, and finding a path.

...which are all eased seemingly due to it being open world in scope. None of these are negatives per se, but again just from what I've seen it feels like the difficulty is overstated. I'll find out myself later in the year once I pick it up, but if you can strategize decently, the game looks more than manageable. Which can probably be said for other Souls games too, but ER especially so.

Worldwide PC will be the biggest platform for from software with Elden Ring. I feel quite confident in saying that.

Given certain PC-centric markets like China and South Korea, I can potentially see that. Either that, or PlayStation will just edge out PC for top platform for the game.

We've heard these rumors of a PS5 Pro, but maybe it's a console similar to the Series S that is easier to produce. That actually makes a lot of sense since the gen just started. Microsoft made a brilliant move and Sony is going to copy it now! Just watch!!

It's an interesting thought, but I don't think it would fit Sony's ongoing console strategy. They probably don't want to throw yet another specification for developers to optimize and scale for considering the various others already on the market (PS4, PS4 Pro, PS5, XSS, XSX, PC, Switch).

I do think they should still do a new portable with base PS4-level performance but on Zen 2 & RDNA 2. Position it as a way to carry PS4 forward, Remote Play stream with PS5 games, and act as a new platform of sorts for smaller teams to concentrate on where their games can natively play on PS4 consoles & PS5 if users choose. As a portable it'd also open up certain markets better for them, such as Japan.

They probably don't want to create a lower-spec'd PS5 in all honesty, because there's already so much demand for the base PS5 and a new APU of that type would compete with base PS5 on chip wafers, RAM capacities, storage I/O components etc. They really just need to open up a means for being able to produce more chips, though I can see a cheaper PS5 SKU that acts as a "relaunch" of sorts of the PS5 Digital, only this time including a disc drive but smaller internal storage (maybe even 128 GB?) that would be expandable with open-market M.2 drives like the other PS5 model.
 

DenchDeckard

Gold Member
Do you deliberately try being stupid? So where have Sony sold nearly 120 million PS4? And 18 million PS5? Don't tell me it's just the US and UK eh?

any business would tell you, that you focus on your largest customer bases and markets first. So basically, the US, UK, JAPAN and parts of Europe like Spain. So where are these consoles clever clogs?

i Think it’s pretty obvious to anyone with a brain that tech companies are struggling massively with production. Worse than ever. Sony is struggling with the ps5. Wait till numbers come out again. It’s going to be even further behind the PS4.
 
Last edited:

Lognor

Banned
I do think they should still do a new portable with base PS4-level performance but on Zen 2 & RDNA 2. Position it as a way to carry PS4 forward, Remote Play stream with PS5 games, and act as a new platform of sorts for smaller teams to concentrate on where their games can natively play on PS4 consoles & PS5 if users choose. As a portable it'd also open up certain markets better for them, such as Japan.

They probably don't want to create a lower-spec'd PS5 in all honesty, because there's already so much demand for the base PS5 and a new APU of that type would compete with base PS5 on chip wafers, RAM capacities, storage I/O components etc. They really just need to open up a means for being able to produce more chips, though I can see a cheaper PS5 SKU that acts as a "relaunch" of sorts of the PS5 Digital, only this time including a disc drive but smaller internal storage (maybe even 128 GB?) that would be expandable with open-market M.2 drives like the other PS5 model.
Sony won't do another portable. No one wants a Sony portable anymore. The type of portable you're talking about was already done with the Vita. It was WELL ahead of the 3ds. 3ds games looked horrible in comparison. Yet people bought the 3ds, not the Vita. What has changed in the last decade that a PS portable would succeed now when it didn't then? Nintendo is as strong in the portable space now as they were then. A powerful PS portable that could be at PS4 levels would be extremely expensive and the battery would be shit. Who is going to buy that? Not many people.

And streaming on a portable probably isn't a great idea either. You either need 4g/5g built in (which would require a separate monthly charge on your cell phone bill) or you need to be connected to wifi. Doesn't seem like a great idea to market it as a portable streaming device. I don't think the streaming games being sold on the Switch are lighting the world on fire.

Yes, there is a ton of demand for a PS5, but they are losing so many sales right now because they can't keep up with demand. Whereas the Xbox is continuing to sell because of the Series S. The Series consoles have outsold the PS5 in the US year to date! That is crazy to think! I know the US is Xbox's strongest market, but still, so is the PS5! If they could make a lower end console to get into customers' hands they could make a lot more money. But the ship might have already sailed. They might be too late to make a lower spec'ed console now. It probably takes a lot of research and it would be a long while before it materialized. But I'm sure Sony leadership would think long and hard about it if they knew how successful the Series S was going to be.
 

John Wick

Member
any business would tell you, that you focus on your largest customer bases and markets first. So basically, the US, UK, JAPAN and parts of Europe like Spain. So where are these consoles clever clogs?

i Think it’s pretty obvious to anyone with a brain that tech companies are struggling massively with production. Worse than ever. Sony is struggling with the ps5. Wait till numbers come out again. It’s going to be even further behind the PS4.
Ah so you managed to add Japan and Europe to the list now? Apparently there is nearly 1 million PS5 in Japan which could have been shared to the USA and UK. As Sony have a bigger market share they Obviously have to share their console more especially in Europe.
 
Sony won't do another portable. No one wants a Sony portable anymore. The type of portable you're talking about was already done with the Vita. It was WELL ahead of the 3ds. 3ds games looked horrible in comparison. Yet people bought the 3ds, not the Vita. What has changed in the last decade that a PS portable would succeed now when it didn't then? Nintendo is as strong in the portable space now as they were then. A powerful PS portable that could be at PS4 levels would be extremely expensive and the battery would be shit. Who is going to buy that? Not many people.

How can you say no one wants a Sony portable anymore? It's actually a common request from a lot of people, and business-wise would make sense for markets such as parts of Asia, where mobile & portable are big shakers. The Vita's problems all stemmed from its stupid proprietary storage medium format, whose pricing was ridiculous. They wouldn't have that issue these days because even a decent-speed microSD interfaced with a modest decompression I/O subsystem would provide more-than-sufficient storage speeds and help keep costs in mind.

The base PS4 as-is was already selling for a profit years ago, and the Steam Deck has an entry price of $399 with some specs that match well with PS4, such as RAM capacity. We're also talking about a portable two years from now, at the earliest. Battery technology will continue to improve, and mobile Zen 2 (which is all such a device would need, albeit as an 8C/8T instead of 4C/8T like the Steam Deck) is already very power-efficient. We're also talking about a GPU which would be wider than Steam Deck's in terms of CU count, but lower-clocked, and based primarily on the GCN design of the PS4's but with RDNA2 power efficiency elements implemented into it.

For comparison PS5's CUs are 64% larger than PS4's and that's also with being on 7nm vs 16nm. So a new PlayStation portable device a GCN-derived design, but on 7nm (or possibly 6nm) would have CUs much smaller than PS5's and even PS4's, meaning a smaller GPU, and require much less power than the PS4 to bring similar performance.

The things that have changed between Vita and now for a new PS portable to do well is that there's no need for expensive proprietary storage, certain markets have become way more portable & mobile-centric vs. 10 years ago, and a new Sony portable with PS4-level perf would appeal to those markets better (especially when bringing native BC for all PS4 games on-the-go) and provide more hardware profit globally from a new device while keeping vertical integration of the hardware, software, OS, services, features, QoL & ecosystem as a whole all under one house, offering more optimization of the overall experience by the platform holder.

A lot of people would be pretty interested in such a device IMHO, myself included.

And streaming on a portable probably isn't a great idea either. You either need 4g/5g built in (which would require a separate monthly charge on your cell phone bill) or you need to be connected to wifi. Doesn't seem like a great idea to market it as a portable streaming device. I don't think the streaming games being sold on the Switch are lighting the world on fire.

You misunderstood; I didn't mean streaming in that light, but in terms of remote sharing streaming, and using a PS4 or PS5 as the server in a private network of the user. To basically enable streaming of that user's PS5 content while on the move around the home. That's the primary use-case I was thinking of.

For other types of streaming, I wouldn't picture Sony adding in a 4G/5G module by default, but they could provide an expansion bay for users to insert one themselves if they liked. This isn't meant to be a main way for playing PS5 games, or PS4 Pro-mode games, either. Just an additional option, similar to how Remote Play worked with the Vita & PS4, or the Wii U's tablet functionality for streaming game content onto it.

Also if you feel that strongly about game streaming, doesn't that also have negative implications for xCloud on mobile? At least in this case example you'd have a larger pool of target customers on a device of the same specification/performance level, and reliable consistent performance, control options etc. With actual smartphones devices can run a range even larger than that for PC gaming, not just for performance but for network reliability too because it's both the hosting carrier and the wireless capacity of the client device (both actual hardware and driver support/optimization) that will impact performance, in addition to the streaming client itself (in this case, GamePass xCloud).

Yes, there is a ton of demand for a PS5, but they are losing so many sales right now because they can't keep up with demand. Whereas the Xbox is continuing to sell because of the Series S. The Series consoles have outsold the PS5 in the US year to date! That is crazy to think! I know the US is Xbox's strongest market, but still, so is the PS5!

Are they really losing sales, though? As soon as they big drops, the units sell out instantly, so it's probably better to say Sony are having an issue with delayed sales, rather than lost sales. Otherwise we'd see that reflected in sales capacity once drops occur.

And Series S has done a great job selling Xbox to people who might've otherwise not wanted one, either because they want a Series X but can't find one, or because they would not want an Xbox for more than $299, among other reasons. However I do think if Microsoft could have more Series X out on the market, they'd be placating more of the hardcore/core fans better, and I do think there's still some genuine concern over what having a mix of sold units well in favor of Series S could implicate for 1P software development going forward.

What I mean by that is, if say we reach a point where it's 75% Series S to 25% Series X, will we see more 1P games focus on Series S-tier performance specifications as the base and simply treat Series X as a resolution box, boosting the output resolution, maybe higher framerates, and texture quality? If so will that prevent usage of Series X in ways related to maximizing for its higher geometry culling, triangle rasterization and asynchronous compute capabilities relative to the Series S, in meaningful ways?

This is still a genuine concern going forward because unlike many of Sony's studios, a lot of Microsoft's teams (especially those acquired between Zenimax and soon-to-be ABK) have been primarily 3P developers, so by their nature the path for optimization has come more through benefit of bigger & better raw computational power mixed with a bit (of varying degree) of specific resource optimizations. Teams that have a history of being 1P have had the benefit of working with just a single performance spec for several years, and they naturally develop optimization techniques WRT programming, art design, coding techniques etc. that can do more and more with limited raw power taking advantage of highly specific facets of a singular architecture design.

You actually need a lot of time and experience to do that, and build off it with things like specific/custom API tools etc. Microsoft did not foster this too much with many of their internal teams pre-2018 and with the Zenimax studios it will still take some time, even moreso for the ABK ones once they're fully/officially acquired. Meaning if the ratio of consoles out there starts to heavily favor Series S over the X, that's the platform which will be the base spec for everything else to scale up to, but one can also easily argue that spec'ing out an entire game design for Series S and relegating something like the X for just texture, resolution & framerate boosts is wasting the Series X's fuller potential.

I guess we'll really need to wait and see on that one.

If they could make a lower end console to get into customers' hands they could make a lot more money. But the ship might have already sailed. They might be too late to make a lower spec'ed console now. It probably takes a lot of research and it would be a long while before it materialized. But I'm sure Sony leadership would think long and hard about it if they knew how successful the Series S was going to be.

That's why I mentioned the portable; it wouldn't be a home console per-se, but basically serve as another entry into the PS4 line, and provide streaming of PS5 games effortlessly. Them introducing a "PS5 Series S" equivalent right now or within the next couple of years could actually eat too much into component securement and manufacturing for PS5 itself, the disc version of which they're already making a profit on.

The closest thing Sony will do in terms of a Series S-style device IMO is reintroducing the PS5 Digital but this time as more than a paper launch, and at a point where it can either break even, generate a slight profit or only incur a very slight loss, at $399 or maybe even $349 (though if they do actually make a portable, they might keep PS5 Digital to $399). PS5 Digital was actually a very smart idea, the issue is besides it losing them money per unit they basically gave it a launch in name only.

Getting it out there in real volumes is most likely what they're looking to do, but at earliest that probably won't happen until sometime in 2023. For now, yes, Sony'll just have to hold steady and try getting more PS5s manufactured. But if I were them, aside from finding a means to increase volumes for PS5 Digital, I'd also be considering a new portable system with PS4-level performance on Zen 2 & RDNA 2 (for efficiency, otherwise transpose the GCN architecture to 7nm process), microSD storage with decompression I/O (doesn't have to be PS5 or even Series-level, just good enough) etc.

Offering the entire PS4 library for portable gaming, being an incentive for smaller teams that still want to leverage cross-gen development going forward (could possibly swoon some Japanese developers who've since gone full-Nintendo to consider at least going Nintendo/Sony multiplat again), able to be sold for a decent profit margin Day 1, outperforming Steam Deck spec-wise (just an added bonus/side effect of the strategy, not really the main purpose). Just make sure the screen is good quality; it could maybe even provide a means of portable PSVR2 gaming in a larger-ranged environment (you'd still need a PS5 as well, but the portable could maybe act as an extension for data communication or provide a semi-wireless setup as long as you have the headset plugged into the portable via USB-C, and keep the portable stashed in your pocket).
 

John Wick

Member
Guys do you remember that qoate from Jimbo saying that Sony usually buy studios that they have worked with and have a close relationship with?
Well I hope Jimbo buys FromSoft. This should have been his first port of call. Guaranteed quality games from them.
 
Well, I don't do hoping or wishing for acquisitions, not my bag. But if they just so happen to acquire FromSoft, yes they'll have had a lot of legacy and preexisting working relationship with them to where workplace culture-wise they'd blend right in with Sony's other teams.

There's a good chance it could happen but again, I personally don't like talking about acquisitions unless/until they are officially announced.
 

Mozza

Member
How can you say no one wants a Sony portable anymore? It's actually a common request from a lot of people, and business-wise would make sense for markets such as parts of Asia, where mobile & portable are big shakers. The Vita's problems all stemmed from its stupid proprietary storage medium format, whose pricing was ridiculous. They wouldn't have that issue these days because even a decent-speed microSD interfaced with a modest decompression I/O subsystem would provide more-than-sufficient storage speeds and help keep costs in mind.

The base PS4 as-is was already selling for a profit years ago, and the Steam Deck has an entry price of $399 with some specs that match well with PS4, such as RAM capacity. We're also talking about a portable two years from now, at the earliest. Battery technology will continue to improve, and mobile Zen 2 (which is all such a device would need, albeit as an 8C/8T instead of 4C/8T like the Steam Deck) is already very power-efficient. We're also talking about a GPU which would be wider than Steam Deck's in terms of CU count, but lower-clocked, and based primarily on the GCN design of the PS4's but with RDNA2 power efficiency elements implemented into it.

For comparison PS5's CUs are 64% larger than PS4's and that's also with being on 7nm vs 16nm. So a new PlayStation portable device a GCN-derived design, but on 7nm (or possibly 6nm) would have CUs much smaller than PS5's and even PS4's, meaning a smaller GPU, and require much less power than the PS4 to bring similar performance.

The things that have changed between Vita and now for a new PS portable to do well is that there's no need for expensive proprietary storage, certain markets have become way more portable & mobile-centric vs. 10 years ago, and a new Sony portable with PS4-level perf would appeal to those markets better (especially when bringing native BC for all PS4 games on-the-go) and provide more hardware profit globally from a new device while keeping vertical integration of the hardware, software, OS, services, features, QoL & ecosystem as a whole all under one house, offering more optimization of the overall experience by the platform holder.

A lot of people would be pretty interested in such a device IMHO, myself included.



You misunderstood; I didn't mean streaming in that light, but in terms of remote sharing streaming, and using a PS4 or PS5 as the server in a private network of the user. To basically enable streaming of that user's PS5 content while on the move around the home. That's the primary use-case I was thinking of.

For other types of streaming, I wouldn't picture Sony adding in a 4G/5G module by default, but they could provide an expansion bay for users to insert one themselves if they liked. This isn't meant to be a main way for playing PS5 games, or PS4 Pro-mode games, either. Just an additional option, similar to how Remote Play worked with the Vita & PS4, or the Wii U's tablet functionality for streaming game content onto it.

Also if you feel that strongly about game streaming, doesn't that also have negative implications for xCloud on mobile? At least in this case example you'd have a larger pool of target customers on a device of the same specification/performance level, and reliable consistent performance, control options etc. With actual smartphones devices can run a range even larger than that for PC gaming, not just for performance but for network reliability too because it's both the hosting carrier and the wireless capacity of the client device (both actual hardware and driver support/optimization) that will impact performance, in addition to the streaming client itself (in this case, GamePass xCloud).



Are they really losing sales, though? As soon as they big drops, the units sell out instantly, so it's probably better to say Sony are having an issue with delayed sales, rather than lost sales. Otherwise we'd see that reflected in sales capacity once drops occur.

And Series S has done a great job selling Xbox to people who might've otherwise not wanted one, either because they want a Series X but can't find one, or because they would not want an Xbox for more than $299, among other reasons. However I do think if Microsoft could have more Series X out on the market, they'd be placating more of the hardcore/core fans better, and I do think there's still some genuine concern over what having a mix of sold units well in favor of Series S could implicate for 1P software development going forward.

What I mean by that is, if say we reach a point where it's 75% Series S to 25% Series X, will we see more 1P games focus on Series S-tier performance specifications as the base and simply treat Series X as a resolution box, boosting the output resolution, maybe higher framerates, and texture quality? If so will that prevent usage of Series X in ways related to maximizing for its higher geometry culling, triangle rasterization and asynchronous compute capabilities relative to the Series S, in meaningful ways?

This is still a genuine concern going forward because unlike many of Sony's studios, a lot of Microsoft's teams (especially those acquired between Zenimax and soon-to-be ABK) have been primarily 3P developers, so by their nature the path for optimization has come more through benefit of bigger & better raw computational power mixed with a bit (of varying degree) of specific resource optimizations. Teams that have a history of being 1P have had the benefit of working with just a single performance spec for several years, and they naturally develop optimization techniques WRT programming, art design, coding techniques etc. that can do more and more with limited raw power taking advantage of highly specific facets of a singular architecture design.

You actually need a lot of time and experience to do that, and build off it with things like specific/custom API tools etc. Microsoft did not foster this too much with many of their internal teams pre-2018 and with the Zenimax studios it will still take some time, even moreso for the ABK ones once they're fully/officially acquired. Meaning if the ratio of consoles out there starts to heavily favor Series S over the X, that's the platform which will be the base spec for everything else to scale up to, but one can also easily argue that spec'ing out an entire game design for Series S and relegating something like the X for just texture, resolution & framerate boosts is wasting the Series X's fuller potential.

I guess we'll really need to wait and see on that one.



That's why I mentioned the portable; it wouldn't be a home console per-se, but basically serve as another entry into the PS4 line, and provide streaming of PS5 games effortlessly. Them introducing a "PS5 Series S" equivalent right now or within the next couple of years could actually eat too much into component securement and manufacturing for PS5 itself, the disc version of which they're already making a profit on.

The closest thing Sony will do in terms of a Series S-style device IMO is reintroducing the PS5 Digital but this time as more than a paper launch, and at a point where it can either break even, generate a slight profit or only incur a very slight loss, at $399 or maybe even $349 (though if they do actually make a portable, they might keep PS5 Digital to $399). PS5 Digital was actually a very smart idea, the issue is besides it losing them money per unit they basically gave it a launch in name only.

Getting it out there in real volumes is most likely what they're looking to do, but at earliest that probably won't happen until sometime in 2023. For now, yes, Sony'll just have to hold steady and try getting more PS5s manufactured. But if I were them, aside from finding a means to increase volumes for PS5 Digital, I'd also be considering a new portable system with PS4-level performance on Zen 2 & RDNA 2 (for efficiency, otherwise transpose the GCN architecture to 7nm process), microSD storage with decompression I/O (doesn't have to be PS5 or even Series-level, just good enough) etc.

Offering the entire PS4 library for portable gaming, being an incentive for smaller teams that still want to leverage cross-gen development going forward (could possibly swoon some Japanese developers who've since gone full-Nintendo to consider at least going Nintendo/Sony multiplat again), able to be sold for a decent profit margin Day 1, outperforming Steam Deck spec-wise (just an added bonus/side effect of the strategy, not really the main purpose). Just make sure the screen is good quality; it could maybe even provide a means of portable PSVR2 gaming in a larger-ranged environment (you'd still need a PS5 as well, but the portable could maybe act as an extension for data communication or provide a semi-wireless setup as long as you have the headset plugged into the portable via USB-C, and keep the portable stashed in your pocket).
Looking at the Sony Vita sales I would say not enough people would want another Sony handheld to make it viable for Sony to make one, and of course take resources away from the PS5.
 

Lognor

Banned
How can you say no one wants a Sony portable anymore? It's actually a common request from a lot of people, and business-wise would make sense for markets such as parts of Asia, where mobile & portable are big shakers. The Vita's problems all stemmed from its stupid proprietary storage medium format, whose pricing was ridiculous. They wouldn't have that issue these days because even a decent-speed microSD interfaced with a modest decompression I/O subsystem would provide more-than-sufficient storage speeds and help keep costs in mind.
A common request from a lot of people? LOL! What?! Since when? No, it's not. It is probably as much as a request from people as it was before the Vita launched. And look how that turned out. It completely bombed. Again, the Vita was significantly more powerful than a 3ds but the 3ds mopped the floor with it. What has changed in the past ten years where a PS portable would be successful when the Vita wasn't?

And no, the Vita did not bomb SOLELY due to its proprietary storage format. Sure, that was one of the reasons, but not the only reason. It also was too expensive. It also did not have content people were interested in. It also had a shit battery life. Mostly it was the lack of content. And content is king. You think Sony could support both a portable console and the PS5? Nintendo struggled to do that once they finally switched to HD gaming which have significantly longer development cycles. There is no way that Sony could put out enough content for both the PS5 and a portable. So what? It gets PS4 ports? It gets cross gen games? What is the point of this device? It doesn't seem to have one!

The base PS4 as-is was already selling for a profit years ago, and the Steam Deck has an entry price of $399 with some specs that match well with PS4, such as RAM capacity. We're also talking about a portable two years from now, at the earliest. Battery technology will continue to improve, and mobile Zen 2 (which is all such a device would need, albeit as an 8C/8T instead of 4C/8T like the Steam Deck) is already very power-efficient. We're also talking about a GPU which would be wider than Steam Deck's in terms of CU count, but lower-clocked, and based primarily on the GCN design of the PS4's but with RDNA2 power efficiency elements implemented into it.
You really should not compare a PS portable to the Steam Deck. Sony would want to sell significantly more devices than the Steam Deck will ever end up selling. The Steam Deck is extremely niche. Sony would not accept a niche portable device. They would want success on the same level as the PS5. Because if it's not successful, why bother doing one? In the hopes that you will sell a few more devices in Japan? Japan is lost to Sony at this point. A portable will not bring that audience back.

The things that have changed between Vita and now for a new PS portable to do well is that there's no need for expensive proprietary storage, certain markets have become way more portable & mobile-centric vs. 10 years ago, and a new Sony portable with PS4-level perf would appeal to those markets better (especially when bringing native BC for all PS4 games on-the-go) and provide more hardware profit globally from a new device while keeping vertical integration of the hardware, software, OS, services, features, QoL & ecosystem as a whole all under one house, offering more optimization of the overall experience by the platform holder.

A lot of people would be pretty interested in such a device IMHO, myself included.
Again, proprietary media is not what killed the Vita. Its main issue was it didn't have any compelling content. A successor is not going to solve that. Most PS gamers do not want a portable. And that majority would complain nonstop about Sony devoting resources to a portable device instead of the PS5. We saw it with the Vita and PS4! We saw it with Sony's cross gen games! The majority of PS gamers want PS5 content! You include yourself in that lot that wants a PS portable, but I would bet money you owned a Vita and PSP. You do not speak for the rest of the PS base.

You misunderstood; I didn't mean streaming in that light, but in terms of remote sharing streaming, and using a PS4 or PS5 as the server in a private network of the user. To basically enable streaming of that user's PS5 content while on the move around the home. That's the primary use-case I was thinking of.

For other types of streaming, I wouldn't picture Sony adding in a 4G/5G module by default, but they could provide an expansion bay for users to insert one themselves if they liked. This isn't meant to be a main way for playing PS5 games, or PS4 Pro-mode games, either. Just an additional option, similar to how Remote Play worked with the Vita & PS4, or the Wii U's tablet functionality for streaming game content onto it.

Also if you feel that strongly about game streaming, doesn't that also have negative implications for xCloud on mobile? At least in this case example you'd have a larger pool of target customers on a device of the same specification/performance level, and reliable consistent performance, control options etc. With actual smartphones devices can run a range even larger than that for PC gaming, not just for performance but for network reliability too because it's both the hosting carrier and the wireless capacity of the client device (both actual hardware and driver support/optimization) that will impact performance, in addition to the streaming client itself (in this case, GamePass xCloud).
But didn't the Vita do the same thing? Couldn't you stream PS4 games to it? So we're not talking about anything new here? Nothing that will make it more compelling than the Vita that bombed? Hmmm yeah your case makes no sense!

You're comparing xcloud for MOBILE to a PS portable device, not PS streaming on a mobile device. BIG difference! People will tolerate streaming to a device they already own for a lesser experience. Will they buy a dedicated device for that same purpose? Nope! Look at Stadia! Sure, Sony might be able to make a device that matches with Stadia sales but I'm guessing that's not what they're after!

Are they really losing sales, though? As soon as they big drops, the units sell out instantly, so it's probably better to say Sony are having an issue with delayed sales, rather than lost sales. Otherwise we'd see that reflected in sales capacity once drops occur.
Yes, they are losing sales. You cannot expect that everyone that wanted a PS5 over the past year or longer are still holding out. We know some people opted for a Series S or X instead. Will they come back to the PS5 once its available? Some will; some won't. And even if you want to assume these are "delayed sales" money today is worth more than money tomorrow. Sony wants that money today, not in a year or two or three. They're losing money by not selling units today, even if those sales are delayed, as you say.

And Series S has done a great job selling Xbox to people who might've otherwise not wanted one, either because they want a Series X but can't find one, or because they would not want an Xbox for more than $299, among other reasons. However I do think if Microsoft could have more Series X out on the market, they'd be placating more of the hardcore/core fans better, and I do think there's still some genuine concern over what having a mix of sold units well in favor of Series S could implicate for 1P software development going forward.

What I mean by that is, if say we reach a point where it's 75% Series S to 25% Series X, will we see more 1P games focus on Series S-tier performance specifications as the base and simply treat Series X as a resolution box, boosting the output resolution, maybe higher framerates, and texture quality? If so will that prevent usage of Series X in ways related to maximizing for its higher geometry culling, triangle rasterization and asynchronous compute capabilities relative to the Series S, in meaningful ways?
Well we will have to see on that, won't we? I don't think any third party will ever favor the Series S as the target platform. LOL. These developers are also developing for the PS5 and PC, right? So that's not how development works. And for a Xbox exclusive game, Microsoft would ensure the Series X is the target platform. No need to worry about that!

That's why I mentioned the portable; it wouldn't be a home console per-se, but basically serve as another entry into the PS4 line, and provide streaming of PS5 games effortlessly. Them introducing a "PS5 Series S" equivalent right now or within the next couple of years could actually eat too much into component securement and manufacturing for PS5 itself, the disc version of which they're already making a profit on.
I don't believe that is true. Microsoft has deftly been able to walk that line between supply of the Series S and X consoles. You don't think Sony has the same ability? We know Sony has been able to secure more PS5 units than Microsoft has with Series X. Sony has strong relationships with their suppliers, better than Microsoft. But you don't think Sony could do it? Microsoft is doing it! It can be done. Sony would have been smart to make a Series S console from the start. They missed a HUGE opportunity. Granted, I don't think many people know the supply issues we were going to face worldwide, so there was definitely some luck involved with Microsoft. But Sony has born withness to the massive success of the Series S for 16+ months. They could learn a thing or two! But alas, it may be too late for that. I don't know. That is something that Sony needs to figure out. Maybe they already have. But a Series S type of PS5 is a better use of their resources than a portable. Sony has failed at portables. Why try again? It's not worth it. They would fail again. Nothing has changed since the Vita.

The closest thing Sony will do in terms of a Series S-style device IMO is reintroducing the PS5 Digital but this time as more than a paper launch, and at a point where it can either break even, generate a slight profit or only incur a very slight loss, at $399 or maybe even $349 (though if they do actually make a portable, they might keep PS5 Digital to $399). PS5 Digital was actually a very smart idea, the issue is besides it losing them money per unit they basically gave it a launch in name only.
That makes no sense. The PS5 digital is sold out. Why lower the price of that device? It won't generate more sales!

Getting it out there in real volumes is most likely what they're looking to do, but at earliest that probably won't happen until sometime in 2023. For now, yes, Sony'll just have to hold steady and try getting more PS5s manufactured. But if I were them, aside from finding a means to increase volumes for PS5 Digital, I'd also be considering a new portable system with PS4-level performance on Zen 2 & RDNA 2 (for efficiency, otherwise transpose the GCN architecture to 7nm process), microSD storage with decompression I/O (doesn't have to be PS5 or even Series-level, just good enough) etc.

Offering the entire PS4 library for portable gaming, being an incentive for smaller teams that still want to leverage cross-gen development going forward (could possibly swoon some Japanese developers who've since gone full-Nintendo to consider at least going Nintendo/Sony multiplat again), able to be sold for a decent profit margin Day 1, outperforming Steam Deck spec-wise (just an added bonus/side effect of the strategy, not really the main purpose). Just make sure the screen is good quality; it could maybe even provide a means of portable PSVR2 gaming in a larger-ranged environment (you'd still need a PS5 as well, but the portable could maybe act as an extension for data communication or provide a semi-wireless setup as long as you have the headset plugged into the portable via USB-C, and keep the portable stashed in your pocket).
Offering the PS4 library portably is not a very compelling proposition. Sony is making more and more PC ports of their PS4 games and those games can be played on a Steam Deck. Where does the advantage of a PS portable come into play? To play old games? We saw Sony fail at such a value prop with their PS classic device. That too was a huge failure. But Sony will get it right this time? Yeah, I don't see it. Sony puts all their resources into their core console and that is for the best. Their portable line failed. Their classic console failed. I don't see anything different that would lead to success this time. The PS faithful have already played those PS4 games. And now they're going to pay $300+ to replay (and repay for them!) them on a portable device? Seems unlikely! Do you really think there are a huge number of gamers out there that want to play the PS4 library but haven't bought a PS4 but WOULD buy a portable device? No. Those people, by and large, do not exist. To appeal to a large group of people they would need original content; not PS4 games. And to develop original content they would need to divert resources from PS5 games. And the PS faithful would not like that. There is no win here for Sony in the portable space. At best they need to hope that streaming catches on to such a degree that they can be successful with streaming to mobile devices. That's the only way they find success in a portable fashion; through streaming on mobile devices, not by selling dedicated portable hardware.
 
Looking at the Sony Vita sales I would say not enough people would want another Sony handheld to make it viable for Sony to make one, and of course take resources away from the PS5.

But Vita was a catch-22. The proprietary storage format made people not want to support it. Considering the PSP sold 80+ million, it's obvious Vita's failure wasn't so much due to natural dropoff but because Sony themselves screwed something up majorly along the way.

There aren't any conditions in the market where they'd need to risk making that type of design decision screw-up again.

A common request from a lot of people? LOL! What?! Since when? No, it's not. It is probably as much as a request from people as it was before the Vita launched. And look how that turned out. It completely bombed. Again, the Vita was significantly more powerful than a 3ds but the 3ds mopped the floor with it. What has changed in the past ten years where a PS portable would be successful when the Vita wasn't?

Dude there are a good lot of people who would like a new portable from Sony. Besides, a new Sony portable would potentially light a fire under Nintendo's rear to innovate again with their hardware designs. People always say Sony needs a viable competitor in Microsoft to keep them honest, why is Nintendo exempt from similar? Why should Nintendo failing with a console every other gen (Wii U being the last one) be the catalyst for them to do better with successor hardware? Why would people want Nintendo to risk that happening?

And that's considering a new Sony portable would even be positioned as its own unique device. I'm really just proposing something with PS4 level performance in portable form, for people to take their PS4 library on-the-road, and possibly also stream PS5 games to, potentially opening the brand up for a new market segment that doesn't have to "beat" Nintendo to be successful. It'd serve a specific niche and act as another revenue stream off hardware sales alone, and possibly gain back some Japanese and smaller global indie support that might've gone Nintendo & mobile-only the past decade.

By your logic, there's no reason for a new Xbox, simply because they've been outsold by PlayStation. If Xbox doesn't need to "mop the floor" with PlayStation in console sales to be viable, Sony doesn't need to "mop the floor" with Nintendo in portable sales to have a sustainable portable platform.

And no, the Vita did not bomb SOLELY due to its proprietary storage format. Sure, that was one of the reasons, but not the only reason. It also was too expensive. It also did not have content people were interested in. It also had a shit battery life. Mostly it was the lack of content. And content is king. You think Sony could support both a portable console and the PS5? Nintendo struggled to do that once they finally switched to HD gaming which have significantly longer development cycles. There is no way that Sony could put out enough content for both the PS5 and a portable. So what? It gets PS4 ports? It gets cross gen games? What is the point of this device? It doesn't seem to have one!

Again, you're mistaking me thinking Sony should make a Vita 2. When I say "Sony portable", I mean something with a specific market niche aimed mainly at portable PS4 gaming on-the-go, serving as a streaming option for PS5 games either via Remote Play or through the cloud. If the Spartacus rumors end up true, it could be a great means of modern portability for PS1, PS2, PS3, PSP and PS Vita games, running either locally or streamed. It could even act as a benefit for PSVR2.

And possibly, for developers who still want to develop cross-gen games for PS4 and PS5 a while longer, it could give them a larger market segment for PS4 version of those games since a new portable offering native PS4 performance and compatibility gives that game a new way to be played, via in portable format on a dedicated portable device. PS4 is still selling strong at $299 and that's at a for-profit MSRP. Depending on volume of production for a portable, they could price it at $299 two years from now (when it'd launch) at slight profit, or potentially a higher price like $349 or $399 depending on certain features, or even $249 if they wanted to be very aggressive with large volumes (though I don't see that being a likely price point).

This strategy basically means Sony wouldn't need to make content specifically for the portable; think of it how Nintendo handles software development for the Switch. That's a hybrid system so it's technically a portable & a home console (when docked), but they aren't making a specific Mario platformer for the portable and another for the console. It's the same one game, you can just choose to play it on a docked console or take it on the go.

Same strategy here for Sony, except now you're talking about software already made with cross-gen in mind, that can either run on a dedicated console (PS4, PS4 Pro, PS5) or a portable (a new Sony portable). Current-gen games could run on the portable via Remote Play or cloud streaming. That way developers can still focus on just one hardware spec (PS5) and Remote Play/cloud streaming will handle functionality of that game on the portable device.

As for the purpose, well I just went over use-cases, but if you want some comparisons, it's basically a cross between Microsoft's strategy with the XBO and Series S. For current-gen MS games going forward, play on XBO systems is going to be handled via the cloud streaming. For Series S, native downscaled versions are made. Sony may not want to complicate the dev pipeline with yet another device that would need a native port, but if it's capable enough for Remote Play and cloud streaming, that brings in a value proposition for people who may want to take their PS5 content on the road as long as they're okay with cloud streaming (or Remote Play, including maybe a way where remote PS5s can act as access server points for user library content if they back that content/library up to the cloud).

You really should not compare a PS portable to the Steam Deck. Sony would want to sell significantly more devices than the Steam Deck will ever end up selling. The Steam Deck is extremely niche. Sony would not accept a niche portable device. They would want success on the same level as the PS5. Because if it's not successful, why bother doing one? In the hopes that you will sell a few more devices in Japan? Japan is lost to Sony at this point. A portable will not bring that audience back.

I don't see how Japan is "lost" to Sony necessarily when they're already at 1+ million there, and they've signed commercial contracts with the biggest pop star in the country. The way this generation's going, if they keep pace with unit deliveries they should at least match PS4's numbers in the region. But supposing they can't, and supposing that market is open for a portable that could provide streaming of PS5 software content (as well as portability for PS4 games), then a new portable device would be a great option to have.

Sony may not necessarily want or need such a portable device, whose main purpose is to extend functionality and use-cases of legacy software content (and provide streaming of new software content), to sell in volumes similar to what the PSP did in its day. Basically, take what volume numbers they have for the PS4, and convert them to this hypothetical device. That's what possible numbers would potentially look like, especially if they place it as something with decent profit margins (at $349 - $399, it would definitely provide good profit margins off the hardware alone, mimicking Nintendo's strategy). In actuality they would likely sell notably higher numbers than that.

Again, proprietary media is not what killed the Vita. Its main issue was it didn't have any compelling content. A successor is not going to solve that. Most PS gamers do not want a portable. And that majority would complain nonstop about Sony devoting resources to a portable device instead of the PS5. We saw it with the Vita and PS4! We saw it with Sony's cross gen games! The majority of PS gamers want PS5 content! You include yourself in that lot that wants a PS portable, but I would bet money you owned a Vita and PSP. You do not speak for the rest of the PS base.

And if Sony can provide more PS5 units of manufacture to meet that demand, then the portable idea becomes redundant. But if that can't happen, then possibly a portable can fit into the picture.

But didn't the Vita do the same thing? Couldn't you stream PS4 games to it? So we're not talking about anything new here? Nothing that will make it more compelling than the Vita that bombed? Hmmm yeah your case makes no sense!

Products don't always bomb because they're bad ideas, but rather they could have been introduced at the wrong time, or marketed the wrong way. Pricing, etc. could have been culprits. A new portable device with Vita's strengths and none of its weaknesses could possibly find good market success in today's market, especially since it's mainly going to serve as a means for functionality of legacy content.

You're comparing xcloud for MOBILE to a PS portable device, not PS streaming on a mobile device. BIG difference! People will tolerate streaming to a device they already own for a lesser experience. Will they buy a dedicated device for that same purpose? Nope! Look at Stadia! Sure, Sony might be able to make a device that matches with Stadia sales but I'm guessing that's not what they're after!

It's a bit disingenuous to use Stadia as an example for why Sony's approach wouldn't work. Stadia had marketing issues, pricing issues, and nowhere near the brand power of PlayStation or a company behind it with even a fraction of gaming market experience as Sony.

Yes, they are losing sales. You cannot expect that everyone that wanted a PS5 over the past year or longer are still holding out. We know some people opted for a Series S or X instead. Will they come back to the PS5 once its available? Some will; some won't. And even if you want to assume these are "delayed sales" money today is worth more than money tomorrow. Sony wants that money today, not in a year or two or three. They're losing money by not selling units today, even if those sales are delayed, as you say.

People opting for a Series S or X, as you even said, doesn't mean they won't pick up a PS5 when it becomes available and they're able to buy one. Also, console sales maybe not meeting targets due to manufacturing constraints doesn't mean Sony are losing money, which is ultimately what's most important here. Even with having to cut down expected PS5 production numbers last year, they reach a new fiscal year revenue for the division of $27 billion.

That means people in the ecosystem of PS5s are mainly those willing to buy a lot of software, and are the ones with the highest attach ratios. Those still on PS4, apparently it's a good lot of them still buying software for it, and those that are, are also most likely to invest in a PS5 once it's available. In a way not being able to meet even higher manufacturing targets for PS5s is a bit of a benefit since it means reduced operating income for the PlayStation division, and again even in spite of that they've been able to set higher and higher revenue and profit margins every quarter.

It's almost as if console sales aren't the most important thing at play here, and I know I've said this before about Xbox. Not going to suddenly say something different now that Sony's the subject, though yes I'm sure they would like to manufacture more consoles and are itching at the chance to be able to do so.

Well we will have to see on that, won't we? I don't think any third party will ever favor the Series S as the target platform. LOL. These developers are also developing for the PS5 and PC, right? So that's not how development works. And for a Xbox exclusive game, Microsoft would ensure the Series X is the target platform. No need to worry about that!

Except we already have examples where Series X clearly is not the target platform. Actually, it's not even so much about the target platform, but whether the platform which is the target is able to be leveraged by the developer to maximize what's delivered, and a lot of that comes down to developer competency along with tool optimizations.

And I guess for that, yes we'll have to see what happens. We should probably be asking ourselves how the power in these machines will be leveraged because if we're talking about anything beyond texture resolutions, framerates or output resolution targets, the computational differences between the Series S GPU and Series X GPU DO begin to come into the picture as a potential complication which could cut down on games leveraging that type of computational power in Series X for things like asynchronous compute tasks, because the Series S's GPU simply has less CUs to work with.

Therefore any game logic or tasks needing X amount of GPU computational resources for asynchronous compute tasks, will always have X less resources for the task on Series S than the Series X. I mentioned a long time ago that maybe some of these type of tasks can be scaled in volume for the smaller GPU, and I still think that may end up being the case. If so, then my concerns on this topic are unnecessary. However, I do need to at least see a game release demonstrating these ideas/theories in practice in order to prove such to be the case, and we haven't had one yet.

Let's hope Starfield is the first such example, though that's doubtful given they probably would have only stopped work on multiconsole development sometime in 2021, once the deal actually closed, and therefore focus on such versions up to that point might've prevented focus on the things I've been discussing in the past couple paragraphs.

I don't believe that is true. Microsoft has deftly been able to walk that line between supply of the Series S and X consoles. You don't think Sony has the same ability?

Actually no they haven't quite. At various points last year Series X was VASTLY undersupplied compared to demand, and we know this because Microsoft were taking some of those Series X units for their own Azure servers. This didn't start to cease until late Summer last year.

If Sony really are expanding their cloud capacities for bigger server loads, that means they'd have to divert some PS5s to said server clusters (even if they're using Azure, which IIRC they still aren't quite doing yet). If they can only secure say 20% more wafers when adding on a Series S-style model to the product line, and they need 20% of their PS5s manufactured to go into servers, that reduces PS5s for the consumer market to 80%, when it could've been 100%. If demand is already at, say, 150%, then in this example they're underserving demand by 70% when they could've reduced that amount to 30%.

If only a fraction of, say, 5% out of that want a PS5 Series S-style device, now Sony have a 15% oversupply of that model, that could end up selling way more slowly (relatively speaking) than if those were PS5 models. It's a complicated logistics game to manage, and the customer base in Sony's domain in terms of early-gen adopters may not have the same preferences on that front as those Microsoft could be targeting.

That makes no sense. The PS5 digital is sold out. Why lower the price of that device? It won't generate more sales!

I'm saying that by the time they may be able to increase PS5 Digital volume at mass, they could potentially reduce the price slightly to put pressure on Series S pricing, as long as it would mean Sony doesn't lose a lot of money on PS5 Digital as a result.

Offering the PS4 library portably is not a very compelling proposition. Sony is making more and more PC ports of their PS4 games and those games can be played on a Steam Deck. Where does the advantage of a PS portable come into play? To play old games? We saw Sony fail at such a value prop with their PS classic device. That too was a huge failure.

PS Classic was a cluster because of the selection partly, and also because of technical issues with the emulator used. That has no bearing on a new portable initiative in all honesty. I'm glad you mentioned PC, because that IS another option.

However, because Sony wouldn't want to risk reducing loss of percentage cuts from 3P software in the PlayStation ecosystem due to PS power users jumping to PC for content if it were provided Day 1 (as an example), they in fact won't do Day 1 for the majority of their titles, IMO, until they can secure their own storefront and monetize it (through subscription types, and/or ad-supported model too) outside of just pure software sales.

And I honestly don't think they would ever do Day 1 in a sense of all 1P in a subscription service the way Microsoft does with GamePass, not unless they can do so on a per-game basis, likely through game-specific contract-based subscriptions with monthly payment fees up until the cost of the software is paid off for. It is probably the best option for Day 1 into a service for new 1P software for Sony and other major 3P releases TBH, in a means that Sony can sustain and make work for their size and business strategy (they aren't like Microsoft where potential losses in software sales and such can be tanked by sheer corporate size and other divisions pulling in magnitudes more revenue & profit).

But Sony will get it right this time? Yeah, I don't see it. Sony puts all their resources into their core console and that is for the best. Their portable line failed. Their classic console failed. I don't see anything different that would lead to success this time. The PS faithful have already played those PS4 games. And now they're going to pay $300+ to replay (and repay for them!) them on a portable device? Seems unlikely! Do you really think there are a huge number of gamers out there that want to play the PS4 library but haven't bought a PS4 but WOULD buy a portable device? No. Those people, by and large, do not exist. To appeal to a large group of people they would need original content; not PS4 games. And to develop original content they would need to divert resources from PS5 games. And the PS faithful would not like that. There is no win here for Sony in the portable space. At best they need to hope that streaming catches on to such a degree that they can be successful with streaming to mobile devices. That's the only way they find success in a portable fashion; through streaming on mobile devices, not by selling dedicated portable hardware.

I think we'll just need to agree to disagree here because you've really missed my point on the actual use-cases for this hypothetical Sony portable.

However if we're on the subject of a PS5 "Series S" that could potentially feasibly work, I think there is an option: keep PS5 performance targets (10.23 TF, same pixel/texture fillrate, geometry culling/rasterization rate, RT perf, RAM capacity, bandwidth, SSD I/O etc.), remove the Blu-Ray drive and skip the internal NAND for everything but a chip for OS restore partition.

Instead, just use an M.2 SSD with about 128 GB of storage, and let it be upgradable same as regular PS5's. Also perhaps have it operate at more modest performance levels, but again since it'd be upgradeable it would not be a too big an issue because the SSD I/O still has the exact same performance as the regular PS5's. That probably allows them to mass-produce the PS5 Digital with much better margins (they at most lose only a fraction on each unit sold) and can keep it at $399, potentially even $349 a little while later possibly timed with a price cut of PS5 physical to $449 (you wouldn't see these price cuts for either PS5 until probably late 2024 at earliest, or even later than that in all honesty).
 
Top Bottom