PlayStation 5 Pro accounted for 19% of total PlayStation 5 units sold in the month and 28% of dollars. Launch month dollar sales of PlayStation 5 Pro were more than 50% higher than the November 2016 launch month sales of PlayStation 4 Pro, while units were 12% lower.

top 40 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] Pika@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 days ago

My hypothesis of this is that, this is happening because a lot of people were unable to acquire the PS5 at launch due to supply issues, and by the time the supply issues resolve themselves interest was lost and the customers were like I'll just get the next one, then the next one ended up being $200 more but since they had already missed the previous iteration and they don't want to buy a downgrade they were forced to either stay with their current PS4 or by the upgrade.

My point is I don't think that this is a sustainable model, the more they increase the price the more app that the everyday consumer is going to say man this isn't worth upgrading between the base model and the pro model, and while they might see short term profits rise, instead of buying both models people will only buy one which will lower long term profits

[–] MajorHavoc@programming.dev 62 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I'm not sure this tells us much, since the first buyers are usually the ones who don't care what it costs.

The big question is how long can it maintain the higher price, once the enthusiasts all have theirs.

[–] Aielman15@lemmy.world 13 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Considering that the standard PS5 is still selling for higher than its launch price 4 years later (despite still facing challenges building up an exclusive library to justify the cost), I'd say that people are just dumb and will pay any price to have their shiny gaming console.

[–] MajorHavoc@programming.dev 1 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

I kind of get that. I stopped buying PlayStations when the PS3 was so hard to get, for so long.

I've loved every PlayStation I've owned.

[–] kalr@meinreddit.com 37 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Would still choose a Steam Deck over this anyway.

[–] AlphaOmega@lemmy.world 9 points 3 days ago

Or a PC

[–] kratoz29@lemm.ee 3 points 3 days ago (3 children)

Still? Is it powerful enough to run the latest games without tweaking?

Not criticizing, I genuinely want one, but tech advances quickly and it seems everyone is jumping to the PC handheld market (and I am glad for it).

[–] kalr@meinreddit.com 4 points 2 days ago

Surprisingly for the most part, yes.

A good example for me was that it ran Black Myth Wukong at around 40fps.

[–] ripcord@lemmy.world 15 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Like 98% of them, yes.

[–] Don_alForno 8 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (2 children)

You mean on the small screen, right?

People's use cases seem to be wildly different from mine. I mainly use it in TV mode as a couch gaming machine. For most modern 3d games you have to turn graphics quality down substantially that way.

Edit: A downvote does not constitute an answer or a counter argument.

[–] PieMePlenty@lemmy.world 11 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (2 children)

The reality is, deck can handle most games out there in handheld mode. For the latest and greatest games, visual fidelity has to be sacrificed. While the deck has its uses on the TV, it's not a good choice if that's all you will be using it for.

My deck, TV docked experiences have been with Mario Kart wii, doom 3, cuphead, SOMA, Scorn, Stray and a bunch of older 2d and 3d titles. I think it handled these games well. Not so sure it would be the same with "AAA latest and greatest".

[–] Don_alForno 3 points 3 days ago

I'm by no means talking about AAA latest and greatest. I tried Everspace 2 and Visions of Mana. Both need considerable tuning down, after which Everspace manages a fluid experience, while VoM still stutters while looking horrible. I haven't dared to even try the likes of Witcher 3 (which people are talking about playing on the deck). I'll probably stick with pixel art etc for TV mode, and go back to the ps5 for more demanding things.

[–] sour 2 points 3 days ago (2 children)

But the deck is also insanely good at decoding screens. I stream triple A Games from my PC to my deck on the TV with ease.

[–] Don_alForno 3 points 3 days ago

But then, my steam link could already do that.

[–] PieMePlenty@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago

Its a good machine for that but theres nothing unique about it (steam link on phones and natively on TVs as an app is theoretically free). I did play through the whole Days Gone (60 hrs to platinum) by streaming it from PS4 to deck in my bed. Good experience.

[–] kratoz29@lemm.ee 1 points 2 days ago

Yeah, I'd be concerned about that too... I mean who is not in for a Switch replacement/successor?

[–] pycorax@lemmy.world 5 points 3 days ago

Depends, I played Yakuza 8 with no issues ok launch and the newer stuff like the Ally haven't had a significant jump in performance.

[–] Itsamelemmy@lemmy.zip 11 points 3 days ago (3 children)

I feel like I'm the target audience for this and I have no interest. Ive bought every PlayStation, including the PS4 pro, though I did wait for the 3 to hit $400. I've had ps+ since the PS3.

I still have plus until july as I'd always buy a year or 2 on black friday sales. They've jacked the price of plus so much that I'm very unlikey to renew now. And $700 for the pro is fucking stupid. If the PS6 continues on this trend, I might just be completely done with them even though I really do like the exclusives.

[–] Pika@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 days ago

I fully agree, I've been slowly drifting away from consoles since the tail end of the PS3. For the price it just really isn't worth it anymore for how much I use. This time around I ended up going the X through they're all access pass because it came the 3 years of Game Pass ultimate, and that was pretty cool not 200 plus dollars a year cool but it was pretty cool, and then when the PS5 became available I got that against my better judgment because I have been Sony my entire life and I wanted Ragnarok (which I ended up never finishing).

I was juggling two different subscriptions for a while a PlayStation Network and a Microsoft Game Pass subscription, but since I still use both of them it was kind of worth it, then Sony increased their price without offering any competitive reason for doing so for any benefits so I canceled and moved over to almost exclusively Xbox until my ultimate ran out,

Now I have neither subscriptions and both consoles collect dust because neither console has a subscription that I feel is worth paying for, or offers any content that I can't just use my computer for without the need of paying a monthly sub. Last generation was iffy, this generation there's no way it's worth.

[–] histic@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 3 days ago

Except most the major exclusives are on pc so they aren’t even really exclusive

[–] stringere@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 days ago

I hear you. I've had every playstation since the PS1. We even own a PS4 and PS4 Pro. Mythbusters was the beginning of the end for me. When they yanked Mythbusters without warning or recompense it drove home what I already knew: my digital library was only as good as the whims of Sony. I haven't made a purchase on their platform since.

And like you I also have Plus for a while, but I've noticed more offerings are starting to be PS5 only. And maybe it's bias informing my experience but I could swear they've already begun enshitifying the PS4 store the same way they degraded the PS3 store when the 4 came out. They removed some of the browsing options, like browsing by category.

[–] MyOpinion@lemm.ee 24 points 3 days ago (1 children)

PS5 Pro is a strait up rip off. Only suckers would buy this.

[+] warm@kbin.earth -8 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Consoles exist to grift, now they are realising they might not need to sell the actual hardware at a loss anymore.

[–] Pika@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

The hardware hasn't been sold at a loss for years now though, the last console that they actually sold at a loss was the base ps3 which for 4 years even with accessory sales still didn't break even, the PS4 had broken even by the 6-month Mark and the PS5 broke even by the 8th month mark

I assume with the PS5 Pro being $200 more, it's going to break even by the two or three month mark

edit: added ps3 after base, apperently somehow deleted that

[–] warm@kbin.earth 1 points 1 day ago

Well, yeah, you are right. They only sell at a loss initially until the hardware is old and therefore cheaper.

[–] Dariusmiles2123@sh.itjust.works 15 points 3 days ago (3 children)

Yeah but the consoles still have to be cheap enough for people like me not making the jump to PC gaming.

So I’d say they have to be careful about the hardware price compared to a PC.

Nothing beats the ease of use of a console, but I can tell you that if prices starts getting close, I’d pribably buy a PC that I can use for way more than gaming and watching movies.

[–] Agent_Karyo@lemmy.world 5 points 3 days ago

It seems the model of subsidized hardware is coming to an end.

New semiconductor fab nodes are becoming more and more expensive. And on the flip side improvements in graphics are becoming more computationally difficult while being less substantial compared to earlier console generations.

PC gaming has also somewhat revitalised over the past ~10 years and more and more PCs are benefiting from "good enough" iGPUs (10 years ago even top iGPUs could not be used for even more moderately demanding games).

[–] ApathyTree@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 3 days ago

Honestly I have to disagree with consoles being ease of use these days, especially if you like really long sessions.

I have to restart games or reboot the console way more often than I feel should be necessary at this point.

And installing from discs takes forever if you even do physical, but then you need the disc in to run it for whatever dumbfuck anti-piracy reason. I won’t pay for digital, at that point you might as well be on pc, it’s the same thing, and since this generation is probably the last with physical media, I’m out..

[–] warm@kbin.earth 4 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Oh yeah, they will still have "cheap" ones, but they will make these "Pro" versions more and more expensive.

PCs are a lot easier to use than they used to be, you don't have to mess around like you used to, just the initial setup (which is done for you if you buy a prebuilt one anyway).

But yeah, the initial cost puts people off, even though the long term savings are incredible. Ignoring the cheaper cost of games, just from the console online subscriptions over 5 years, you are saving over $400 (and the last generation of consoles was 8 years, so that's well over $600 of savings).

I'd highly recommend anyone tries PC, you have so much more freedom than you do on a console. There's a reason the PC market share is growing so fast.

[–] Pika@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 days ago

Yeah the subscription costs alone pay for the difference between the hardware for the PC and the console, they average 6 or 7 years between releases and the subscription cost is 70 a year, so That's $420 over the six year period and when the console is $700 that means your budget for a PC would be 1,100, and that's not including the fact that games very rarely go on sale on Console like they do in PC you don't have the ability to do much gray Market side and you have no control over the system.

Myself for example, I spent between 1,100 and 1,200 on a PC back in 2016 that's almost 10 years ago now I've upgraded my Hardware a few times, each time averaging about $200. But that was because I chose to I only really would need to have upgraded once and it would have been about a $400 upgrade, I'm spending less upgrading my system I would if I bought a console every time it released, and I have the capability of doing whatever the hell I want on my computer and I don't have the financial drain of the subscription

[–] stardust@lemmy.ca 3 points 3 days ago

I've enjoyed how I can still play the games I first got on my PC were increased resolution and fps by just going to the settings instead of begging for devs to push an update. Also not being rendered unplayable on new hardware like on my older consoles. For longevity my PC games have aged really nicely compared to the games I got for consoles over the generations.

[–] KoboldCoterie@pawb.social 21 points 3 days ago

Well, this all but guarantees that we'll see more ridiculously high priced consoles in the future, too. Good going, folks!

[–] Mandy@sh.itjust.works 11 points 3 days ago

Not surprised.
People buy product, get excited for next product. Works every time.

[–] pastel_de_airfryer@lemmy.eco.br 13 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Sony saw how much money people were willing to pay scalpers for the PS5 at launch and decided to cut the middleman this time

[–] Blackout@fedia.io 10 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Well no one is saving for retirement anymore. Climate change will take care of that. Live it up.

[–] blackris@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 3 days ago

Hey hey, some of us here are hoping for the 2060s and 70s to still be nice enough!

[–] Gamoc@lemmy.world 3 points 3 days ago

If you bought this you are a fucking moron.

[–] NIB@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Meanwhile in Sweden, it is 944 USD.

[–] acosmichippo@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

does that include a VAT?

[–] NIB@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Yes but even with 25% VAT, it should have been 875 USD. And in other countries, it is 800€ (830 USD). Amazon.de sells it for 800€(sold by Amazon) and even delivers it to Sweden(for 15€). Amazon.se doesnt have the ps5 pro for some reason.

I think Sony was willing to take a small loss in Eurozone, so that it can have a nice round price(800€).