4 ms·

This seems ridiculous. Sony sells consoles at a loss and makes it money on game sales etc. If this succeeds that will kill that business model and who benefits

by pipes 3y ago

This seems ridiculous. Sony sells consoles at a loss and makes it money on game sales etc. If this succeeds that will kill that business model and who benefits from that?

diggan 3y ago
If Sony is forced to allow alternative stores on PlayStation with different pricing, so they actually have to compete, then the consumers benefit.
- PrimeMcFly 3y ago
  If Apple isn't forced to allow other stores why would Sony be?
  - drooopy 3y ago
    This looks like it's about to change, at least in the EU.
- crop_rotation 3y ago
  Nobody benefits if the game consoles get commoditised like PCs. In the long run it would become an unattractive business like PC and people will just buy PCs if the prices become similar for the spec.
  - danuker 3y ago
    Which begs the question: why do people buy consoles at all? Why don't they buy PCs? I have never owned nor seen the attraction of a gaming console as opposed to a general PC.
    - id00 3y ago
      A few: cheaper, takes less space, don't need to know what cpu/gpu you need to buy, it just works, don't need to look for game hardware reqs The older I get and the less time I have to tinker with PC, the more I appreciate consoles
      - dvngnt_ 3y ago
        you end up waiting for console updates
        falcolas 3y ago
        While the console still has to do updates, their sleep mode makes even those fairly painless for an end user.
    - gjsman-1000 3y ago
      Well, I’ll give you my logic, why I collect for the Nintendo Switch. I inherited an Atari and small NES game collection from my grandparents. They’re games about ~35-45 years old. When my grandparents bought those games, and when my mother was playing them, handing them on to the next generation certainly wasn’t a consideration - but that day came. Now imagine yourself 35 years from now. That Steam game that was delisted 25 years ago, barely runs on Windows whatever-it-is, and can’t be transferred, isn’t going to be a very viable option. And that’s just the beginning. I get a mountain of joy from loaning titles to friends and family. Often, more than even playing the game itself. Not happening with Steam. You might say, “just go pirate.” To which I say, you seriously expect a free and open internet in 35 years at this rate?
    - nightski 3y ago
      Have fun building a 4k ray tracing capable PC for $500. The GPU alone is going to cost you that much. Plus while steam big picture mode is possible, it's kind of a pain compared to the simplicity of hooking up a console right to your big screen TV.
    - crazygringo 3y ago
      Much cheaper, much smaller, much easier to set up and use and trust it'll all just work. If you've already got a basic laptop you use for everything else, and are just looking for a normal gaming experience (not modding or cheating or maxing out graphics), why would you buy a PC instead? It's all downsides. (If you don't have a laptop and already do all your computing on a PC desktop then using that for gaming makes more sense. But even then, your desktop is often in your home office while you want to do your gaming on your big-screen TV -- so you still get a console.)
      - gjsman-1000 3y ago
        I think the biggest implied benefit is sailing the high seas (cough cough) and the low price of Steam deals. For me, sure, Steam prices are great; but the fact that it can be taken away from me for any reason and I can never sell/give any item means I’m basically buying… what, exactly? It feels like buying an IOU for a game. As for piracy, well, I don’t think I need say more.
        crazygringo 3y ago
        Ah, I suppose that would make sense. On the other hand, for people who can't afford a ton of games but want to play a ton of games, Xbox Game Pass has been huge. I actually wonder if Game Pass has had any effect in reducing piracy the way Spotify had a gigantic effect on music piracy. Or if Game Pass and pirates are distinct groups without much overlap.
      - danuker 3y ago
        If I've got a laptop and am looking for "normal" gaming experiences, rather than the latest AAA games, I'll load up an old or light game on it. Why would I buy a separate piece of hardware taking up more space in my home and life? More money down the drain. Sure, it's nice that it "just works", but so does `pacman -Sy xonotic`.
        crazygringo 3y ago
        Nobody's talking exclusively about the "latest AAA games". But they are generally referring to the graphics-intensive games that have been available on consoles for the past ten years. That's what "normal gaming" is. CoD, GTA, Halo. Mainstream multiplayer stuff and similar single-player. Not one of which runs on an average laptop. People buy consoles to run console-type games. In the conversation around PCs vs consoles, I think you know nobody's talking about Pac-Man here.
    - pjmlp 3y ago
      Developers, because for the most part it is a single piece of hardware to support and extract the best performance from. Users, just plug and play, without caring about drivers, and thousand of other stuff a regular OS is full with.
    - jwells89 3y ago
      Even with all the improvements in the last couple of decades, PC gaming is a much more tinkery, finicky, and even error prone experience than console gaming is. You’ve got to contend with the mess that is Windows (Linux is improving but is even more tinkery) and its idiosyncrasies, keeping drivers up to date in some cases and rolling them back in others depending on what the driver update improves/breaks. You’ve got to know what makes a gaming PC good so you don’t get ripped off with some giant overpriced ball of aggressively angled plastic and LEDs with terrible airflow. You’ve gotta know to wipe and reinstall clean Windows or at least how to remove bloatware. And if you really want to get the most out of the experience, you need to know how to build a PC and how to set up RAM speeds in BIOS and all that. And even after all that, there’s a decent chance you’ll come home from work hoping to fire up your favorite game only to find that some combination of factors has broken it, leaving you SOL until the game gets another update or you dive under the hood to fix it yourself. Meanwhile with e.g. a PS5 you just buy it, put it on your TV stand, plug it in, and boot it up. Boom, it’s running your games optimally, no knowledge or tinkering required. It doesn’t randomly break, it reliably just works. I have a custom gaming tower and it’s nice to have but damn if it isn’t a pain in the rear from time to time. I can absolutely see the appeal in something more plug and play even at the cost of some performance.
    - pipes 3y ago
      Because at launch you get a very attraction value proposition, a very high end piece of kit priced way below equivalent pc specs. Also developers tend to squeeze more and more out of this hardware as it ages, unlike pcs where hardware upgrades are often required sooner. I can't play games as much as I used to (being a parent leaves little free time). But when I did I owned pcs and consoles. I don't think I'm biased on the issue. I enjoy both. But none of my friends played pc games, they weren't into tinkering etc.
    - Jeremy1026 3y ago
      I buy consoles instead of gaming on PC because I know I can buy a console and it'll work with new games for the next 5+ years. When I started playing games a PC would need to be upgraded multiple times in the console lifespan to continue to play new games well.
  - xxs 3y ago
    >if the game consoles get commoditised like PCs That might be bad for Sony share holders (to a degree) but it's excellent in general.
    - ericmay 3y ago
      I would definitely disagree and I think you can look squarely at appliances like "Smart" TVs as an example of a more obvious future with the commoditization. It'll basically turn into fast-fashion. Drop a new console with the latest features and OS, stop supporting it, move on to the next one. Etc. Microsoft, Sony, and Nintendo have done in my opinion a great job in the gaming sphere by producing pretty good quality consoles at affordable prices. Certainly there is room for improvement, but this continued assault seeking to "commoditize" everything from iOS to Playstation just ensures that it turns to shit. Commoditization isn't a moral good, neither is open-source.
crazygringo 3y ago
The $499 PS5 is not sold at a loss: https://www.theverge.com/2021/8/4/22609150/sony-playstation-5-ps5-loss-profit https://www.theverge.com/2021/8/4/22609150/sony-playstation-... Consoles are often sold at a loss initially but quickly become profitable as hardware costs fall. The razor-and-blades model isn't as ubiquitous as you might believe.
- dalbasal 3y ago
  Precisely. Sure, considering the platform-game paradigm different products sources cross subsidize one another a different stages of their life cycles. This is just how firms work, and is often mostly a matter of accounting.
  - xxs 3y ago
    Alternatively, the goods can have different taxes applied as well.
- TerrifiedMouse 3y ago
  I think it yo-yos because eventually they cut the cost of hardware over its life cycle. On average I think consoles are sold at break even.
- pipes 3y ago
  Commented below, but applies this too, at console launch gamers get a Great piece of kit subsidized by the manufacturer's bet that they can make the money back on games. Equivalent spec pcs cost way more. For years this model has worked great in physical media sales, I don't have a problem with it in online media. If we want companies like Sony to produce consoles they need a way to make them profitable. It's an extremely risky investment with no guarantee of success. Lastly if 30 percent is "unfair" developers would not use the platform. But they do. Same for consumers. If all parties in this didn't derive value they wouldn't trade with each other.
  - rchaud 3y ago
    > Lastly if 30 percent is "unfair" developers would not use the platform. But they do. Same for consumers. My PS3 was my last console for this reason. Developers pay the publishing charge and make up the loss with micro-transactions or shallow GOTY editions. In cases where they don't add tedious amounts of "grind" mechanics to extend gameplay time, they'll just make them multiplayer-centric. The whole thing has become a racket.
xxs 3y ago
>Sony sells consoles at a loss and makes it money on game sales etc. So you are saying that they are engaging in anti-competitive practices. Also at $500, it's unlikely a loss.
- LeafItAlone 3y ago
  Selling something at a loss to make money elsewhere is not inherently anti-competitive in many locations. Depends on where you are.
  - xxs 3y ago
    >Depends on where you are. The filed case is in the UK. So there is that. It applies to the EU as well.
- Algent 3y ago
  Pretty sure it's 550 now, price went up a while ago.
  - xxs 3y ago
    Ahh well, at that price point, I guess one can just get a similar new PC with way better spec - e.g. intel 12400 on 660B + amd 7600xt + 32gb ram + 2TB ssd + case/psu is around $600 new, entirely retail (newegg) price. It does not include keyboard/mouse/gamepad, but thing has 44GB of combined memory (compared to the 16 of ps5). It's a pretty decent machine for everyday use.
delecti 3y ago
Realistically, most people won't install another store. And if that prediction doesn't come true, then Sony will stop selling hardware at a loss, so the people who benefit would be people who buy a lot of games. And in any case, console manufacturers aren't "owed" a razor-and-blades business model.
TerrifiedMouse 3y ago
Frankly I think they can allow this without hurting their business. I mean “allowing other stores” was the default before online stores - i.e. vast majority of games used to be sold by retailers that aren’t Sony. How does Sony/Nintendo/Sega make money back in the day? Royalty fees. Every copy of a game sold on their platform, they get 10-20%. If you refuse then you don’t publish at all - all consoles have lockout mechanisms; NES/SNES has a lockout chip you can only get from Nintendo, modern consoles require all executables to be digitally signed or they won’t run and guess who has the keys, … Apple would be hurt by allowing alt stores though since they don’t charge royalties. But if forced to open up iOS to alt stores, I think they will start charging royalties like consoles do.
criddell 3y ago
> kill that business model That's not really their business model. Sony has never sold a console that, over the life of the product, has lost money on hardware. Microsoft may have with the XBox and their red ring problem, but that's not really relevant to this discussion. Who benefits? Consumers mostly. Sony likes that model because it is more profitable for them. It also raises a barrier to competitors. If everybody else sells hardware at a loss, it makes it more difficult to launch a new console.
danaris 3y ago
No business model is more important than upholding consumer rights and preventing anticompetitive behavior. No business model has a Constitutional right to exist, period.
matheusmoreira 3y ago
> If this succeeds that will kill that business model and who benefits from that? Everyone. They shouldn't be allowed to price dump computer components so they can charge fat margins by enforcing DRM. They shouldn't even be allowed to own the platform at all. The EU should hit these video game companies with the same laws they're going to hit Google and Apple with. Gotta put an end to their little digital fiefdoms.
- pipes 3y ago
  Careful what you wish for. If Sony can't profit from license fees for games on its console then there is no incentive to create the console in the first place.

by pipes 3y ago

This seems ridiculous. Sony sells consoles at a loss and makes it money on game sales etc. If this succeeds that will kill that business model and who benefits from that?

diggan 3y ago

If Sony is forced to allow alternative stores on PlayStation with different pricing, so they actually have to compete, then the consumers benefit.

PrimeMcFly 3y ago
If Apple isn't forced to allow other stores why would Sony be?
- drooopy 3y ago
  This looks like it's about to change, at least in the EU.
crop_rotation 3y ago
Nobody benefits if the game consoles get commoditised like PCs. In the long run it would become an unattractive business like PC and people will just buy PCs if the prices become similar for the spec.
- danuker 3y ago
  Which begs the question: why do people buy consoles at all? Why don't they buy PCs? I have never owned nor seen the attraction of a gaming console as opposed to a general PC.
  - id00 3y ago
    A few: cheaper, takes less space, don't need to know what cpu/gpu you need to buy, it just works, don't need to look for game hardware reqs The older I get and the less time I have to tinker with PC, the more I appreciate consoles
    - dvngnt_ 3y ago
      you end up waiting for console updates
      - falcolas 3y ago
        While the console still has to do updates, their sleep mode makes even those fairly painless for an end user.
  - gjsman-1000 3y ago
    Well, I’ll give you my logic, why I collect for the Nintendo Switch. I inherited an Atari and small NES game collection from my grandparents. They’re games about ~35-45 years old. When my grandparents bought those games, and when my mother was playing them, handing them on to the next generation certainly wasn’t a consideration - but that day came. Now imagine yourself 35 years from now. That Steam game that was delisted 25 years ago, barely runs on Windows whatever-it-is, and can’t be transferred, isn’t going to be a very viable option. And that’s just the beginning. I get a mountain of joy from loaning titles to friends and family. Often, more than even playing the game itself. Not happening with Steam. You might say, “just go pirate.” To which I say, you seriously expect a free and open internet in 35 years at this rate?
  - nightski 3y ago
    Have fun building a 4k ray tracing capable PC for $500. The GPU alone is going to cost you that much. Plus while steam big picture mode is possible, it's kind of a pain compared to the simplicity of hooking up a console right to your big screen TV.
  - crazygringo 3y ago
    Much cheaper, much smaller, much easier to set up and use and trust it'll all just work. If you've already got a basic laptop you use for everything else, and are just looking for a normal gaming experience (not modding or cheating or maxing out graphics), why would you buy a PC instead? It's all downsides. (If you don't have a laptop and already do all your computing on a PC desktop then using that for gaming makes more sense. But even then, your desktop is often in your home office while you want to do your gaming on your big-screen TV -- so you still get a console.)
    - gjsman-1000 3y ago
      I think the biggest implied benefit is sailing the high seas (cough cough) and the low price of Steam deals. For me, sure, Steam prices are great; but the fact that it can be taken away from me for any reason and I can never sell/give any item means I’m basically buying… what, exactly? It feels like buying an IOU for a game. As for piracy, well, I don’t think I need say more.
      - crazygringo 3y ago
        Ah, I suppose that would make sense. On the other hand, for people who can't afford a ton of games but want to play a ton of games, Xbox Game Pass has been huge. I actually wonder if Game Pass has had any effect in reducing piracy the way Spotify had a gigantic effect on music piracy. Or if Game Pass and pirates are distinct groups without much overlap.
    - danuker 3y ago
      If I've got a laptop and am looking for "normal" gaming experiences, rather than the latest AAA games, I'll load up an old or light game on it. Why would I buy a separate piece of hardware taking up more space in my home and life? More money down the drain. Sure, it's nice that it "just works", but so does `pacman -Sy xonotic`.
      - crazygringo 3y ago
        Nobody's talking exclusively about the "latest AAA games". But they are generally referring to the graphics-intensive games that have been available on consoles for the past ten years. That's what "normal gaming" is. CoD, GTA, Halo. Mainstream multiplayer stuff and similar single-player. Not one of which runs on an average laptop. People buy consoles to run console-type games. In the conversation around PCs vs consoles, I think you know nobody's talking about Pac-Man here.
  - pjmlp 3y ago
    Developers, because for the most part it is a single piece of hardware to support and extract the best performance from. Users, just plug and play, without caring about drivers, and thousand of other stuff a regular OS is full with.
  - jwells89 3y ago
    Even with all the improvements in the last couple of decades, PC gaming is a much more tinkery, finicky, and even error prone experience than console gaming is. You’ve got to contend with the mess that is Windows (Linux is improving but is even more tinkery) and its idiosyncrasies, keeping drivers up to date in some cases and rolling them back in others depending on what the driver update improves/breaks. You’ve got to know what makes a gaming PC good so you don’t get ripped off with some giant overpriced ball of aggressively angled plastic and LEDs with terrible airflow. You’ve gotta know to wipe and reinstall clean Windows or at least how to remove bloatware. And if you really want to get the most out of the experience, you need to know how to build a PC and how to set up RAM speeds in BIOS and all that. And even after all that, there’s a decent chance you’ll come home from work hoping to fire up your favorite game only to find that some combination of factors has broken it, leaving you SOL until the game gets another update or you dive under the hood to fix it yourself. Meanwhile with e.g. a PS5 you just buy it, put it on your TV stand, plug it in, and boot it up. Boom, it’s running your games optimally, no knowledge or tinkering required. It doesn’t randomly break, it reliably just works. I have a custom gaming tower and it’s nice to have but damn if it isn’t a pain in the rear from time to time. I can absolutely see the appeal in something more plug and play even at the cost of some performance.
  - pipes 3y ago
    Because at launch you get a very attraction value proposition, a very high end piece of kit priced way below equivalent pc specs. Also developers tend to squeeze more and more out of this hardware as it ages, unlike pcs where hardware upgrades are often required sooner. I can't play games as much as I used to (being a parent leaves little free time). But when I did I owned pcs and consoles. I don't think I'm biased on the issue. I enjoy both. But none of my friends played pc games, they weren't into tinkering etc.
  - Jeremy1026 3y ago
    I buy consoles instead of gaming on PC because I know I can buy a console and it'll work with new games for the next 5+ years. When I started playing games a PC would need to be upgraded multiple times in the console lifespan to continue to play new games well.
- xxs 3y ago
  >if the game consoles get commoditised like PCs That might be bad for Sony share holders (to a degree) but it's excellent in general.
  - ericmay 3y ago
    I would definitely disagree and I think you can look squarely at appliances like "Smart" TVs as an example of a more obvious future with the commoditization. It'll basically turn into fast-fashion. Drop a new console with the latest features and OS, stop supporting it, move on to the next one. Etc. Microsoft, Sony, and Nintendo have done in my opinion a great job in the gaming sphere by producing pretty good quality consoles at affordable prices. Certainly there is room for improvement, but this continued assault seeking to "commoditize" everything from iOS to Playstation just ensures that it turns to shit. Commoditization isn't a moral good, neither is open-source.

crazygringo 3y ago

The $499 PS5 is not sold at a loss: https://www.theverge.com/2021/8/4/22609150/sony-playstation-5-ps5-loss-profit https://www.theverge.com/2021/8/4/22609150/sony-playstation-... Consoles are often sold at a loss initially but quickly become profitable as hardware costs fall. The razor-and-blades model isn't as ubiquitous as you might believe.

dalbasal 3y ago
Precisely. Sure, considering the platform-game paradigm different products sources cross subsidize one another a different stages of their life cycles. This is just how firms work, and is often mostly a matter of accounting.
- xxs 3y ago
  Alternatively, the goods can have different taxes applied as well.
TerrifiedMouse 3y ago
I think it yo-yos because eventually they cut the cost of hardware over its life cycle. On average I think consoles are sold at break even.
pipes 3y ago
Commented below, but applies this too, at console launch gamers get a Great piece of kit subsidized by the manufacturer's bet that they can make the money back on games. Equivalent spec pcs cost way more. For years this model has worked great in physical media sales, I don't have a problem with it in online media. If we want companies like Sony to produce consoles they need a way to make them profitable. It's an extremely risky investment with no guarantee of success. Lastly if 30 percent is "unfair" developers would not use the platform. But they do. Same for consumers. If all parties in this didn't derive value they wouldn't trade with each other.
- rchaud 3y ago
  > Lastly if 30 percent is "unfair" developers would not use the platform. But they do. Same for consumers. My PS3 was my last console for this reason. Developers pay the publishing charge and make up the loss with micro-transactions or shallow GOTY editions. In cases where they don't add tedious amounts of "grind" mechanics to extend gameplay time, they'll just make them multiplayer-centric. The whole thing has become a racket.

xxs 3y ago

>Sony sells consoles at a loss and makes it money on game sales etc. So you are saying that they are engaging in anti-competitive practices. Also at $500, it's unlikely a loss.

LeafItAlone 3y ago
Selling something at a loss to make money elsewhere is not inherently anti-competitive in many locations. Depends on where you are.
- xxs 3y ago
  >Depends on where you are. The filed case is in the UK. So there is that. It applies to the EU as well.
Algent 3y ago
Pretty sure it's 550 now, price went up a while ago.
- xxs 3y ago
  Ahh well, at that price point, I guess one can just get a similar new PC with way better spec - e.g. intel 12400 on 660B + amd 7600xt + 32gb ram + 2TB ssd + case/psu is around $600 new, entirely retail (newegg) price. It does not include keyboard/mouse/gamepad, but thing has 44GB of combined memory (compared to the 16 of ps5). It's a pretty decent machine for everyday use.

delecti 3y ago

Realistically, most people won't install another store. And if that prediction doesn't come true, then Sony will stop selling hardware at a loss, so the people who benefit would be people who buy a lot of games. And in any case, console manufacturers aren't "owed" a razor-and-blades business model.

TerrifiedMouse 3y ago

Frankly I think they can allow this without hurting their business. I mean “allowing other stores” was the default before online stores - i.e. vast majority of games used to be sold by retailers that aren’t Sony. How does Sony/Nintendo/Sega make money back in the day? Royalty fees. Every copy of a game sold on their platform, they get 10-20%. If you refuse then you don’t publish at all - all consoles have lockout mechanisms; NES/SNES has a lockout chip you can only get from Nintendo, modern consoles require all executables to be digitally signed or they won’t run and guess who has the keys, … Apple would be hurt by allowing alt stores though since they don’t charge royalties. But if forced to open up iOS to alt stores, I think they will start charging royalties like consoles do.

criddell 3y ago

> kill that business model That's not really their business model. Sony has never sold a console that, over the life of the product, has lost money on hardware. Microsoft may have with the XBox and their red ring problem, but that's not really relevant to this discussion. Who benefits? Consumers mostly. Sony likes that model because it is more profitable for them. It also raises a barrier to competitors. If everybody else sells hardware at a loss, it makes it more difficult to launch a new console.

danaris 3y ago

No business model is more important than upholding consumer rights and preventing anticompetitive behavior. No business model has a Constitutional right to exist, period.

matheusmoreira 3y ago

> If this succeeds that will kill that business model and who benefits from that? Everyone. They shouldn't be allowed to price dump computer components so they can charge fat margins by enforcing DRM. They shouldn't even be allowed to own the platform at all. The EU should hit these video game companies with the same laws they're going to hit Google and Apple with. Gotta put an end to their little digital fiefdoms.

pipes 3y ago
Careful what you wish for. If Sony can't profit from license fees for games on its console then there is no incentive to create the console in the first place.