PlayStation is reportedly ditching its PC release strategy, and most first-party games will now be console exclusive

PlayStation is reportedly ditching its PC release strategy, and most first-party games will now be console exclusive
From reports, MS is not interested in the console model anymore. It doesn't make sense for this system as the idea behind subsiding the console is that you make your money back on the software, which goes out the window for PC titles.

I don’t think Microsoft will subsidise the next Xbox either. The old model only worked when you were locked into the Xbox Store, and that’s not the world they’re building anymore. What matters to MS is:
  • keeping gamers on Windows
  • getting gamers to subscribe to Game Pass
  • keeping developers tied to DirectX and Windows APIs
The new hardware will still have clear advantages though:
  • it should be cheaper than building a like‑for‑like gaming PC
  • drivers update automatically without hardware/driver conflicts
  • one unified library across Xbox and PC
  • cross‑save and cross‑play inside the Xbox ecosystem
  • full backward compatibility with the existing Xbox catalogue
  • developers should have easy task as they are only developing for Windows/DirectX
  • av outputs to easily work on home TV and audio
  • xbox accessories will just work
And some disadvantages:
  • Price (I doubt it will be less than $1000 on launch)
  • No longer a pure console (feels like an end of an era)
  • I doubt it will be upgradable except for maybe storage.
  • Lazy devs only only pushing "PC" games and not taking advantage of the features available on the hardware.
 
Just my 2c on the subsidizing topic.

I was also under the impression that Sony was selling hardware at a profit, due to the shift during the PS4 era.
Source: Sony not expecting PS3-like losses for PS4
So I did some homework here, because in the back of my mind I imagined they continued on that trend, but it doesn't seem to be the case.

On average the PS4 cost about $381 to build against a $399 launch price.
By comparison even the 120GB PS3 Slim was still estimated to lose more than $36 per unit in late 2009.
With earlier unit having an even greater loss at about -$306.85 per 20GB PS3 and -$241.35 per 60GB PS3 at launch.
Source: https://fortune.com/2006/11/16/sonys-loss-is-at-least-240-on-every-ps3/

The PS3 was only reported to be profitable around late 2011.

Similarly the PS5 has also reportedly launched below manufacturing cost. (See page 22)
Source: https://www.sony.com/en/SonyInfo/IR/library/presen/er/pdf/20q4_sony.pdf

TL;DR this is roughly what estimated profits look like per console sale
1773315600078.png

Disclaimer, the above is just rough napkin math, and just a visual aid based on publicly available data.

It seems PlayStation consoles are indeed to this day still being subsidized (though not as much as the PS3 was).
But this would again be a strong motivation behind dynamic pricing and why Sony is instead leaning on that to help further offset the price of manufacturing.
 
Last edited:
It seems PlayStation consoles are indeed to this day still being subsidized (though not as much as the PS3 was).
But this would again be a strong motivation behind dynamic pricing and why Sony is instead leaning on that to help further offset the price of manufacturing.

The dynamic pricing thing is a bit overblown. It look like it's dynamic pricing on specials, not RRP, which is common practice.. Generally when you shop online, whether retail items, flights or hotels, pricing is modified by profiling things like your location, how often you've looked at the product and what device you're using (people with iPhones get charged more for example).

I don't love it though, and hopefully it's just a test they'll abandon given the response. Then again, whenever I rail against these things my wife is fond of saying "they'll be stupid not to do it" (she's a pricing expert).
 
The dynamic pricing thing is a bit overblown. It look like it's dynamic pricing on specials, not RRP, which is common practice.. Generally when you shop online, whether retail items, flights or hotels, pricing is modified by profiling things like your location, how often you've looked at the product and what device you're using (people with iPhones get charged more for example).

I don't love it though, and hopefully it's just a test they'll abandon given the response. Then again, whenever I rail against these things my wife is fond of saying "they'll be stupid not to do it" (she's a pricing expert).
I think the reason it's such a big deal is because other digital game stores are doing the exact opposite.

For example, on Steam it will actually alert you if the game is available cheaper on the same platform before you checkout.

Here is an example I quickly found from my Wishlist:

Here Tank Mechanic Simulator is available on a special, but when I added it to my cart I got a warning that I can get the same game cheaper if I buy the bundle:
1773317624916.png

Here is what that same recommended bundle will cost me when I added it to my cart:
1773317740584.png
I already own Car Mechanic Simulator, but buying the bundle will mean I just get the game I want for cheaper and only pay R15.21 instead of R16.90.

So it comes across as very "anti consumer" to offer higher prices based on spending habits in this case, when other platforms like Steam will warn you that the game you want is available cheaper.
While it is true that other industries already offer dynamic pricing, when you have other digital game stores in the same industry that are doing the exact opposite, it's hard not to view what Sony is doing in a negative manner.

Similarly digital stores like GOG are making other consumer friendly moves like providing "ownership" of any games you buy there.
While other digital stores including Steam only give you a "license" to play the game.
So looking at these two alternatives, having a digital store for games that will try to charge you as much as possible and only provide a license is not a great look

Also out of interest, I have found some prices on Android, being more expensive than on my iPad.
(ChatGPT's monthly subscription is just one example)
But that's an unrelated topic that doesn't really change anything here for the topic at hand.
And I do agree with your wife on this one, honestly Sony would be stupid not to do this, because from a business standpoint it makes perfect sense.
It's just that from a consumer standpoint, it's really not great and will likely drive some gamers who have choice (like myself) away from the platform instead of towards it.

Which again loops us back to the exclusives being removed from PC.
It makes more sense business wise to have exclusives on a digital store where you can control the price and ensure you get as much money as possible for them.
But still not a very consumer friendly move.
 
Last edited:
What makes you think the new "Xbox" won't be in the $1,000 ballpark? It's essentially a higher specced Microsoft Steam Machine
Think you misread me there. I said the PS6 won’t sell at $1000 and neither will the Xbox. As in there will be no sales not that it won’t be priced at that amount.
 
Think you misread me there. I said the PS6 won’t sell at $1000 and neither will the Xbox. As in there will be no sales not that it won’t be priced at that amount.
If there's one thing I learned working in customer support, it's that there's always a rich mommy and daddy buying their little neckbeard in the basement whatever their little heart desires. 🤣
But that's just a cynical joke and a reflection of how little I think of humanity lately 🤣

In all honesty, I do agree.
$1000 is too steep for a PlayStation (based on what the brand currently offers); it would need to have exclusive titles so freaking amazing that the game awards are completely overrun by them before I consider forking over that kind of money for a PS6.
This is clearly the same Sony again that said "Our ideal [for the PS3] is for consumers to think to themselves, ‘OK, I’ll work more hours and buy it" back in 2005.
So if it's priced at $1000, I would not be surprised, but whether it would sell or sell well at that price point is a different matter entirely that depends on how consumers view its value at the time.

Personally, assuming the new Xbox has better specs than the Steam Machine and is at least close to the PS6 + can play PC games from other digital stores, like Steam, I would gladly fork over $1000 for it.
One thing Sony did get right in 2005 was that they understood that "Whether consumers think a product is expensive or cheap all depends on the balance between its appeal and price".
Which is exactly the point here, too, I think. The difference for me personally would be the variety and quality of games available, which would most affect the appeal to me.
Which is also why I'd say the exclusives on PS6 really need to be mind-blowing on a whole new level to justify a price like that. The PS3 for example, had so many great exclusives it was nearly impossible to ignore. (At least for me personally again.)
At the end of the day, it's the games that will make or break these two consoles.

I think people might be willing to pay $1000, especially with PC hardware being more expensive (and potentially getting more expensive over the next 2 years or so until the AI bubble pops).
So by comparison, this might be the cheapest entry point into "modern gaming" at the time.

PlayStation Quotes Source: Gamespot
 
As you said, Xbox as a console didn't work for them, hence the shift. When everything is an Xbox, why would they give you this hardware for cheap, especially considering there's no financial benefit down the road?


Do you understand what is meant by subsidising the price of the console? Sony has never not done so, they are not charging you for the hardware as one would other electronic products, margins are slim to none.


But they are producing exclusives and will continue to do so, they are the reason for this thread. Games being cheaper overall doesn't offset the price of entry for a lot of people - especially if the hardware is more capable than other hardware at the same price.

Yes but they are committed to producing hardware and like for like nobody is going to pay the extra for the xbox branded hardware so subsidise. In console generations of the past, Sony sold their consoles at a loss and only became profitable as the gen went on. With no competition from xbox they are price leaders and can dictate the pricing. They are being greedy and you cannot convince me otherwise. Games being cheaper is one of the factors that go hand in hand with the hardware accessibility to the casual market. The reason for this thread is to discuss why Sony is ditching the PC and that's pretty clear.. calculated risk to protect their future interests.
 
Yes but they are committed to producing hardware and like for like nobody is going to pay the extra for the xbox branded hardware so subsidise. In console generations of the past, Sony sold their consoles at a loss and only became profitable as the gen went on. With no competition from xbox they are price leaders and can dictate the pricing. They are being greedy and you cannot convince me otherwise. Games being cheaper is one of the factors that go hand in hand with the hardware accessibility to the casual market. The reason for this thread is to discuss why Sony is ditching the PC and that's pretty clear.. calculated risk to protect their future interests.

So MS is going to subsidise their new hardware even though there is no upside for them because they are generous good guys. Sony is going to shoot themselves in the foot by pricing the PS6 like any other electronic device they produce because they are greedy bad guys.

Perfect business sense on both counts.
 
I posted my views on if Xbox will be subsidised or not here, as its not really to do with PlayStation.

 
So onboard with this take:


Honestly really good points.
The reason I loved the PS3 and Xbox 360 so much, is each had amazing exclusives that played to the strengths of the hardware they were built for.
It was really exciting booting up Motorstorm for the first time and using the Sixaxis. Similarly on the PS4, hearing sounds coming from the controller for the first time gave me actual goosebumps. You need titles that are made specifically for your platform that will blow peoples minds and keep them coming back for more.

The one thing that is missing that would recapture that console magic for me is shipping a finished product on a disc that I can play offline at any time.
That is something I felt Nintendo did well, until the Switch 2 released, and it's one of the reasons I didn't buy a Switch 2.
Part of the appeal of a console for me personally is physical media, similar to how he mentioned the appeal of CDs.
I want to know that I can put that game in my console 10 years from now and take a trip down memory lane. I don't want a disk that just triggers a download or something like that. Or a game that's so broken that I need to update it just to play it.

If the PS6 has the same magnitude of amazing exclusives that come complete on disk, I would get that console in a heart beat.

They really just need to sit down and figure out how to make it a great experience again + create some amazing games that makes it worth the asking price.
I personally don't care if a game is exclusive to a console, if it's amazing and the console has a ton of similar games, I'll gladly get it.
But even looking at the Xbox, honestly the last Gears 4 +5 and Halo Infinite were just not that great.
If they were console exclusives, I wouldn't buy the console. Same goes for the PS5 and Spider-man 2 (can't even think of other PS5 titles that even left much of an impression on me). The only reason I've even considered getting a PS5 until now was Demon's Souls.
If Sony just released at least 2 more games that caught my interest the same way, there would be a PS5 in my living room now.
But having just 1 good title isn't enough and personally, I'm really hoping for that "PS3 era magic" again.
If I can have that, they can take my money.
 
Sort of related here as Sony and MS are diverging on their console strategies.

In its latest report, Newzoo projects PC revenue will surpass console revenue by 2028. PC is expected to grow at a 6.6% compound annual growth rate from 2025 to 2028, compared to 4.4% for console.

 
Back
Top Bottom