WIll consoles ever return to their glorious past of strong hardware sold at a loss?

Now with the upgrade trend mid gen i dont think this will ever happen again

I'm entirely sure Xbox consoles are sold at a loss, and have been selling at a loss with how long they've been reporting declines in console hardware revenue.

Phil Spencer implied the X1X was already being sold at a loss, and is now getting its first official price cut this week. So, uh, there you go.

hopefully sony does another 600 dollar beast with a 4k bluray drive and top of the line parts and takes a hit for gamers since we buy games from them

@BenjaminBanklin: Damn, that was quick, although not surprised considering the amount of X1X's I've seen in pawn shops already.

Nope, they will be cheap streaming boxes in a few short years.

Don't think so.

Nope, its dead like console gen.

@ProtossRushX: Sony is in the business of making money. Considering PlayStation is their money maker, don’t count on them creating a console to initially be sold at a loss. Shareholders won’t have it.

Aren't most business in the business of making money?

Why exactly is it glorious to sell at a loss?

While it’s certainly great to get something for cheaper then what it costs the manufacturer to make it’s not really something that I expect them to do.

In the Console realm, power is irrelevant!!!

Coding talent and Artistry is where it's at!!!

Them not selling at a loss is a plus for us. Trust me.

i know at release ps4 were making a loss (probably still are) and xbox still are. they make huge amounts with subscriptions and games, that they can afford to.

Doubt they would ever do that again to that extreme.

A small loss at launch isn't unexpected but I don't see anyone taking a $100+ loss ever again.

Xbone is already being sold at a loss.

Nintendo is the only company that doesn't sell hardware at a loss. Every playstation initially sold at a loss. Every xbox sold at a loss initially. With hardware refreshes that may change but you still need hardware to last 8 years or so.

Only the X1X is selling at a slight loss.

Really? So do tell us for the last 15 years or so what gameplay, technical, graphics or even hardware innovation came from console or console exclusive devs?

Reading comprehension problems???

Coding talent : taking advantage out of every clock cycle of a weak hardware!!! Better resources management!!!

Artistry : Self explanatory!!!

What else???

I think the Wii sold at a gain, I think Nintendo always had gains rather than selling it at a loss. Sony definitely learned their lessons. Good on them.

Taking advantage of every single cycle? Then tell me why are games most often fail to even hit the 30FPS mark even though the industry standard is 60FPS? Coding talent? Then how come all optimization/new techniques originate on PC before making their way to consoles? Talking about artistry then why console industry plays so safe with same template of games and all artistic innovation is happening in the indie space.

It's already clear that next generation of consoles is going to be the last one. After that everything goes to streaming, PC probably too.

With game services coming out the wahzoo, MS and Sony will need to sell consoles at a loss, while building up services to make itself attractive. With streaming and other services, money from third party titles will most likely take a hit as it gets spread out.

Industry standard is 60 fps /HAHAHAHA!!! hermit much???

Plenty of games innovations come also from consoles : google Corrinne Yu or GG for examples!!!

But even if we say like 90% ( large unverified number, so you feel confident ) of innovations come from pc, so what??? Consoles will use them eventuelly, if power allow, knowledge does not belong to hermits!!!

Artistry =/= gameplay ( Look for definition on some online dictionnary )

And games like BB, GOW, NIOH, GR say hello gameplay wise!!!

Indie space is not exclusive to any platform!!!

What else???

Edit : And of course never once did i use the word INNOVATION in my post!!!

Yeah, no. Corrine Yu or GG didn't do anything technically that haven't been done before. They all work on what developers and other engine makers have done years back on PC like Epic, Crytek, Nvidia, DICE etc. Go ahead name one graphics technique they invented or pioneered.

Nope, you said code talent exists on PC which is factually false since none of the technical innovation came from it or at least not for the last 15 or so years. Again the technical talent point is void since many console games still dip below the bare minimum 30 FPS. All they do is follow the lead of PC. Indie space is not limited to PC but most of the time the games born on PC and after being successful found their way to consoles as many devs are on record saying that console gamers don't like to try new things compared to PC gamers.

People are willing to spend a lot more money on a graphics card alone than what the average consumer will pay for a console. Strictly mathematically, the era of powerful consoles was over the moment the PS3 launch price was met with revulsion. It will never happen. Ever.

The gap between PC and console will only ever grow bigger in terms of cost/performance. With some bumps along the way like with the Xbox One X.

The PC will slowly become a better and better deal. They can't do much about it. There is not much of a point in taking a loss because it won't be that impressive anyway. And they may not need to, because the diminishing returns are real. So either way it's not that big a deal.

Microsoft patented a lighting tech, introduced in Halo, thanks to Corrinne Yu...Sure it's a deja vu /smh

Panta Rhei introduced fire and smoke simulation...Sure it's a deja /smh

GG intoduced Temporal Reprojection...among other techs, so what???

"Nope, you said code talent exists on PC which is factually false since none of the technical innovation came from it or at least not for the last 15 or so years."

I said the opposite, by the way. coding mastery is not only innovation ( for what that means optics equations are known for ages ), but also managing to do great things with limited power...

In that regard, it takes more coding skills, to implement new algorithms on a weaker hardware. But feel free to believe otherwise.

"many devs are on record saying that console gamers don't like to try new things compared to PC gamers"

And it suits your narrative to believe such crap??? Good for you.

So, which lighting tech was that? Any thing substantial or just a patent troll? Last I see all the advances in realtime lighting came from Nvidia, then Crytek and again Nvidia. Sorry no meaningful tech in lighting ever come out of any console dev. Like I would want to know what is the technique.

Panta Rhei introduced smoke and fire simulation? Are you out of your mind? Smoke simulation exists as far back as 2007 and even earlier with Physx. Crysis 2 had realtime smoke and fire simulation both effected by lighting and smokes while receing and casting shadows. Same with Mafia 2 that also did things because of Physx support. Lastly Panta Rhei is still not a thing nor was it console exclusive engine.

Temporal reprojection? Wow, cows turned GG's bigges fail and lie this gen into a win. Temporal reprojection exists as far back as early 2000's. Hell temporal reprojection is one of the technique all stereoscopic 3D games used for 3D Tv's last gen including Crysis 2, Killzone 3 etc etc. LMAO, temporal re projection a graphical advancement technique. What other tech GG (not) invented?

Wanna know some of the graphics innovation that all games then copied and still use: RLR, SVOGI, LPV, SSAO, SSDO, SSS, Hybrid Forward + Deferred rendering etc. Anything of the sort any console dev ever did? The only thing I remember close to any advancement was in animation that the studio did for LA Noire which again surpassed by performance capture technology.

And yes, I would beleive the actual devs in a survey over your consolite emotions. They are the ones risking their money making games definitely they would know about where their audience resides.

@Steppy_76: PS4 was never sold at a loss since day 1.

No, it makes no business sense. I'm surprised Sony survived the PS3 generation given how much of a hit they were taking for as long as they did.

Plus, console gaming has only ever been successful when it concentrates on quality software. Just look at how long it took the PS3 to become worthwhile to own.

False

"Sony To Take A Loss On PlayStation 4 Sales. Sony is counting on game sales and PS Plus subscriptions to make the PS4 profitable. According to Eurogamer's "well-placed sources" Sony will take a loss of $60 per hardware unit sold of the PlayStation 4"

So basically you're saying when a lighting solution is promoted by nvidia or crytek ( pc!!! ) it's innovation!!! (Even if both techs can be found on consoles as well!!)

When a different lighting solution is patented by Ms and proven Halo 4 ( Console here ) it's a patent troll!!!

And you want me to take you seriously???

Besides this, innovation was not my main subject.

My subject was artistry and coding talent that are far more useful in a world with closed hardware aka consoles.

And you try to lecture me about Emotions!!!! /Smh

No, I'm saying when a lighting tech specially realtime lighting technique that previously haven't been done and first introduced by a company like Crytek and Nvidia or Epic or IdTech etc that later become standard in the year follows is count as innovation or pioneering i.e. advancing the tech.

Based on that criteria none of the technology initiated on consoles. Sorry you lost that point. I already gave examples of things that PC did that later other devs incorporated, none of the same could be said for console devs.

And as I recall Halo 4 uses baked lighting so how could it be an innovation or advancement in graphics technology? Yeah, thought so you don't know what advancement means.

So, yeah list one graphic technique or hell any technical advancement that came from consoles.

this is true buit fanboys wont have it

Soo it was soo harmful to gamers to get a $400 360 that was similarly powerful to a 2005 $1000 PC? How is that?

no. the closest i would see is a heavily discounted console with a long term subscription plan to live/PSN (where the monthly sub is also higher). similar to mobile phone deals with carriers.

but planning on heavy losses with a strategy just to get the money back on selling games? no. its not sustainable. the only reason it was happening before was sony was using the playstation 2 and 3 as a trojan horse and MS needed to be price and performance competitive as they had built the xbox brand on horsepower with the OGXbox.

gaming hardware needs to make money. it needs to be profitable in the medium to long term. it needs to be worth investing in. if there is no value in it then hardware companies wont bother improving it.

console hardware should be about punching smart, not punching hard.

I could’ve sworn the hardware subsidy was employed by both Sony and MS at launch. I dunno how much the chip shortage required Nintendo to pony up but they’ve never employed the strategy, at least not openly.

Agreed. I don't expect launch consoles to be sold at pure profit (aside from Nintendo), but I am not expecting Sony to allow another hemorrhaging akin to PS3 launch days.

OP: I am not convinced they ever really did.

perhaps the first 2 years xbox and xbox 360 where sold but Moores Law really makes it not possible to last much longer than a few years

They should, MS can easily absorb those losses with its Xbox Live Userbase.

And MS did take a loss on X1X’s sold, maybe not anymore.

I'm primarily a PC gamer but bought a 360 and PS3 because they were so high-end and exotic for the time. The current consoles are running low mid-range borderline off the shelf AMD PC hardware. I haven't bothered with either one of them.

@pc_rocks Proof of console devs coding skills: Games like The Last Of US and Uncharted 3 running on 256 RAM. Compare those games with games that run on 256MB RAM pcs.

It doesn't make business sense anymore. The graphical upgrades are diminishing returns. A month ago it was "hurr durr, teh MS doesn't get it tehy tink it about teh power" and now people want corporations to take losses for? Power.

I don't think any of them will take a big hit for power for any consumer anymore.

Since when can a $400 console compete with a $1,000 PC? Even with the spike in graphics card prices, you can still build a sub-$800 PC with console specs. Before prices shot up you could easily build a sub-$500 PC with console specs.

Anyway, on-topic, no they'll never return to huge losses on hardware. Either someone is going to finally get the Steam Machine idea right and start churning out PC-level consoles with a real OS, or they'll focus on making game streaming devices that can run high-end graphics from a different machine. Or both. Either way, traditional consoles are being squeezed out.

2005 and xbox 360