Sony most likely aren't losing money on the consoles this gen. They've said so themselves.
They don't have an expensive custom-built Cell CPU to worry about. They're using almost off-the-shelf parts.
*** The Official Playstation 4 (PS4) Thread ***
- Thread starter djkav
- Start date
Sony most likely aren't losing money on the consoles this gen. They've said so themselves.
They don't have an expensive custom-built Cell CPU to worry about. They're using almost off-the-shelf parts.
Soldato
its $50 for the year not £50 so still same price as now which is £39.99 but if you look around just like the Xbox Live Sub you can get it cheaper
more intel on it
Last edited:
You got a link to that at all please?
ps3ud0
It depends how much they are paying for the GDDR5, I think worse case is, if you buy a PS4 and a game Sony will break even, best case is they are making £20.00 a unit. There was a market analyst over at Gaf who broke it all down.
Soldato
It was Infamous which is 8GB. And i'm comparing the download and installation to the 360 which is a LOT faster at doing both.
Ok just googled it and you're right. http://www.theverge.com/2013/5/9/4316008/unlike-the-ps3-sony-isnt-expecting-to-lose-money-on-the-ps4
Regardless, the network cost point still stands.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 21 Jun 2006
- Posts
- 38,366
games pay for the network i would imagine, if this is the case then we aren't getting as good a deal as we usually get.
usually we buy for less than what it costs to make, this time round we are paying more than it cost to make.
if they had followed the same model as before imagine how more powerful it could have been, but i am happy with this because sony have made huge losses in the past so it evens out.
also makes you wonder what MS are doing if sony aren't losing money then MS must be raking it in with their lower specs.
usually we buy for less than what it costs to make, this time round we are paying more than it cost to make.
if they had followed the same model as before imagine how more powerful it could have been, but i am happy with this because sony have made huge losses in the past so it evens out.
also makes you wonder what MS are doing if sony aren't losing money then MS must be raking it in with their lower specs.
Soldato
From the Feb announcement Sony said they were aiming to make everything much more instant.
Yeah, the cost isn't £50 though it's still the same price as it always has been.
Don't think Sony could afford to make a loss on each console this gen, They're not in the best shape financially as a whole if I remember correctly. Could be the reason it's no messing with the ps4 as it's very important to them.
There's a lot of speculation MS's BOM is much higher than Sonys, due to custom parts such a ESRAM and kinect sensors.
Quite a spectacular engineering fail if true.
Soldato
They also need to sort out how PSN is handled by some ISP's. I know a few of them consider PSN to be a p2p system so they throttle it which is why downloads are so slow.
Soldato
It didn't seem to be a problem for them with the PS3
EDIT: hang on, there will still be the free online network to play online right? I thought that they were planning to start charging for this. Hopefully not.
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 21 Jun 2006
- Posts
- 38,366
networking doesnt cost that much, i read some article online that it would cost say £100K to run servers for COD for a year, the game makes billions i imagine therefore £100K a year to them is a drop in the ocean.
the money lost on consoles in the past has been made back through licensing, etc.
mone for the network has been made back by sales of games i imagine of which they take a cut i would imagine somewhere so they can use their PSN network.
the money lost on consoles in the past has been made back through licensing, etc.
mone for the network has been made back by sales of games i imagine of which they take a cut i would imagine somewhere so they can use their PSN network.
It didn't seem to be a problem for them with the PS3
EDIT: hang on, there will still be the free online network to play online right? I thought that they were planning to start charging for this. Hopefully not.
Free-to-play games will be free to play online, but other games will require PS+ subscription.
There's no way in hell that servers only cost £100k for a year. A single network admin's salary will be nearly half that, surely.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 21 Jun 2006
- Posts
- 38,366
that was just for 1 game and i think dedicated server costs only
sony would use the same staff they have currently.
but they do not use dedicated servers so the actual servers which run the network cost a lot less.
the article was about how much of a difference in costs it would be to add dedicated servers into psn's network.
basically £100K per year per game
Soldato
So no doubt Infinity studios will make it necessary to subscribe, because they know the sheeple will comply
That isn't a great loss to me. Much of the online content has been a bit carp though, so could a subscription help remedy this? Take GT5 for example, the post game DLC and support was dire.So no doubt Infinity studios will make it necessary to subscribe, because they know the sheeple will comply
I doubt it. PS+ revenue will be go towards the upkeep of the network, I can't see why it'd influence any additional content for games. That's down to the developers.
It was always going to go this way really. If it had remained free, we'd have been stuck with a second-rate service going into the next generation. At least with some money going directly into it, there'll be improvements and we can start expecting and demanding more from the service in terms of reduced downtime, features, integration etc.
I don't play online much so it's not a huge thing for me either way, but I am a PS+ subscriber anyway so it's good that the benefits will be there.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 21 Jun 2006
- Posts
- 38,366
dedicated servers will we ever see them on consoles?
this is what makes the biggest difference.
the main problem with the ps3's network was the ps3, it was simply too crappy to do a lot of things at the same time, due to RAM limitations.
probably the reason why they have went overkill on RAM this time round.
also VM has issues with PSN or their servers, sony will blame VM and VM will blame sony, wo who knows for sure where the problem lies.
this is what makes the biggest difference.
the main problem with the ps3's network was the ps3, it was simply too crappy to do a lot of things at the same time, due to RAM limitations.
probably the reason why they have went overkill on RAM this time round.
also VM has issues with PSN or their servers, sony will blame VM and VM will blame sony, wo who knows for sure where the problem lies.
Don't know about Sony, but MS have said all games will be on dedicated servers with the Xbox One. Off course there is a good few games already out there with dedicated servers.
Soldato
theres dedicated servers for BF3 on both consoles, so if its 64 players on consoles on the next gen then they will be for dedicated for bf4