PlayStation 5 Release Date and Price Officially Announced
- Thread starter GTPNewsWire
- 338 comments
- 23,817 views
- 3,781
- Brisbane, Australia
- Chameleon9000
As far as I am aware, we don’t know Sony's full backwards compatibility plan yet.
What we do know:
PSN subscription holders will get access to a library of PS4s greatest hits for free on launch day.
The vast majority of PS4 games will be backwards compatible with the PS5, so if you own the disc you will almost certainly be able to play your PS4 library no problem.
We don’t know anything official about pre-PS4 games. There were however patents leaked that showed very basic plans for a PS1-3 game streaming service, that would supposedly allow for an extensive library, but essentially nothing is known about it, and it may or may not actually be Sony's long term backwards compatibility plan.
ROAD_DOGG33J
Premium
- 14,216
- IL, USA
- holyc0w1
- holyc0w
LeGeNd-1
Premium
- 7,264
- Australia
- GTP_LeGeNd-1
$750 down here for disc edition 
At least it's been confirmed PS4 wheels will work with PS5 so I can save money on that. What are the chances a Pro edition will be released before GT7? 
As for backward compatibility, my dream would be disc based for PS1/2 and disc/digital for PS4 games. I don't have high hopes though. We'll probably never see PS3 BC due to how hard that system's architecture is to emulate.
At least it's been confirmed PS4 wheels will work with PS5 so I can save money on that. What are the chances a Pro edition will be released before GT7? As for backward compatibility, my dream would be disc based for PS1/2 and disc/digital for PS4 games. I don't have high hopes though. We'll probably never see PS3 BC due to how hard that system's architecture is to emulate.
ROAD_DOGG33J
Premium
- 14,216
- IL, USA
- holyc0w1
- holyc0w
One thing that I forgot with this, is that I have a regular PS4 currently. In theory I can enjoy current PS4 games in better quality even without any updates on the PS5.
Robin
Premium
- 16,799
- United Kingdom
Speaking in an interview with Famitsu in Japan it has been officially confirmed now by Jim Ryan that there is no PS1,2,3 backwards compatibility on the PS5.
I guess it was expected as Sony never mentioned total BC but it is disappointing given Xbox has managed it fine on very similar hardware.
Famitsu
I guess it was expected as Sony never mentioned total BC but it is disappointing given Xbox has managed it fine on very similar hardware.
- 2,976
- southport
Who thinks it will be the same as always, same as ps3/ps4 after a couple of years the games wont be as good as we want, then it`ll be will have to wait till ps6 before we can do this or do that, type of thing...
- 2,518
- somewhere near Trial Mountain
- oldbusanubis
This is the cycle that consoles are stuck in. Oh PS4 is garbage and PS5 will be better, come PS6 and PS5 is garbage. It's all stupid and why I refused to buy into the PS4 and only got the console as a holiday gift.Who thinks it will be the same as always, same as ps3/ps4 after a couple of years the games wont be as good as we want, then it`ll be will have to wait till ps6 before we can do this or do that, type of thing...
Who thinks it will be the same as always, same as ps3/ps4 after a couple of years the games wont be as good as we want, then it`ll be will have to wait till ps6 before we can do this or do that, type of thing...
It depends. Some devs just get on with it and make best use of what they've got, others, *ahem Kaz* start blaming the hardware because they try to do stuff clearly beyond what it is capable of.
- 2,976
- southport
Think i`ll be waiting for a pro release, to get the best benefits, frame rates etc , just like i am with the ps4 pro.....
- 4,559
- Minnesota
- TJ136
Now if only you can announce a pre-order set date for the refill maybe others can actually get it then instead of these quick buy and then sell on ebay for x amount above.
To me I wish that as soon as something goes up on ebay for a pre-order for a pre-order those should be automatically cancelled so that those who want it has a chance.
Since my 4 went poof I want it.
To me I wish that as soon as something goes up on ebay for a pre-order for a pre-order those should be automatically cancelled so that those who want it has a chance.
Since my 4 went poof I want it.
Tired Tyres
Premium
- 12,531
- West Yorkshire
- Tired_Tyres
- Tired Tyres
I doubt there will be one. The PS4/Xbox1 were very underpowered on release and needed an update machine. PS5/X don't seem to be in the same place.
Silent Drifter
Premium
- 1,332
- Wisconsin
- SilentDrifterGT
- SilentDrifterGT
That is good on Sony for admitting that. Also good that they are getting more consoles for preorder. I've been checking my Best Buy order a few times a day, after seeing people having their Best Buy orders canceled on them, for having more preorders than they have planned stock.
- 2,976
- southport
You never know, technology specs soon get more advanced... they`ll be outdated soonish
ROAD_DOGG33J
Premium
- 14,216
- IL, USA
- holyc0w1
- holyc0w
True, but the PS4 was also caught in the 1080p to 4k/2160p transition. If an updated "true 8k" PS5 comes out, I'm not bothering just like I haven't with the PS4 Pro. The difference wasn't big enough.
- 489
- England
Yeah possibly, but like Tired Tyres said, this new gen machines are in a very much stronger position right out of the gate. Partly due to both companies being much more confident in the market but even more so to AMD being much more competitive than 7 years ago. We will get a much more clearer picture in November When the machines are out and RDNA 2 is available across all platforms, to see how close these machines are to the sharp edge of the Radeon market.
- 2,976
- southport
I havent seen anything that looks much different than the ps4 pro to be honest just framerates, and resolution dosent really bother me im only on a 1080 tv, 
- 2,312
- Michigan
- FuriousDemon
I feel like if consoles released last year, they would be competitive against high end PCs. This year, they will probably be competitive against midrange. Still better than what Xbox and PS4 we’re back in 2013, but I feel like that may mean a PS5 pro is coming in 3 years. I feel like with ray tracing being used more frequently and Nvidia having DLSS 2.0 to make frame rates acceptable even at 4k, consoles will not be able to deliver 60 fps even at 4k, let alone 8k that is soon going to be pushed. I really wish that 60 fps would become the new normal, but it feels like consoles are always prioritizing visuals against frame rate.
- 489
- England
Another question is was it worth it for Sony/MS? Did it give them a bigger boost compared to say, a normal reboot like a slim model with more space? I can see that being a big factor.
Neither have I tbh, but we know they will come later on. The only reason I'm going this early for PS5 is because I have quite a few PS4 games I want to play but no PS4. If I still had a PS4 I'd honestly wait a year or so for my mates to get one, and get an XboxSS with a games pass for now, because I'm comfy with 1080 too. I have a 4k TV and my PS5 will be on it but, meh, whatever.
Oh god! I think I've turned into my dad with his Vinyl vs CD arguments 25 years ago!
I havent seen anything that looks much different than the ps4 pro to be honest just framerates, and resolution dosent really bother me im only on a 1080 tv,
Neither have I tbh, but we know they will come later on. The only reason I'm going this early for PS5 is because I have quite a few PS4 games I want to play but no PS4. If I still had a PS4 I'd honestly wait a year or so for my mates to get one, and get an XboxSS with a games pass for now, because I'm comfy with 1080 too. I have a 4k TV and my PS5 will be on it but, meh, whatever.
Oh god! I think I've turned into my dad with his Vinyl vs CD arguments 25 years ago!
- 1,318
- The Pool Of Life.
I keep on seeing consoles compared to graphics card performances of varying levels, when even a mid range graphics cards would probably cost a similar price to these consoles, never mind the CPU, SSD, case etc, which takes the whole PC way beyond what either of these consoles cost by 2-3x. There will always be computers (and their GPU's) more powerful than consoles, but at a much higher cost, at least when the consoles are first released.
Consoles are bought for ease of use, size, and maybe console exclusives. Plus, any games released for a console is guaranteed to work, without the need to upgrade any components. Because it is a fixed system, hopefully games will be optimised better to take advantage of the fixed design of the console, rather than maybe having to upgrade components of a PC further down the line if a new game is beyond what someone may have in their PC system for even basic performance in a new game. If a game is released for PS5 or XBox Series X five years down the line, they will work with no further expenditure beyond the cost of the game. Maybe not the Series S though.
Consoles are aimed at the majority of users who don't want anything to do with PC's, and a consequence of that is not the most powerful games machine. Not saying you can't have both, but most consoles sit under TV's and most PC's don't.
4k and 60fps should be the minimum performance for every game on these new consoles, even the neutered Series S,
but pretty pictures sell, when fast running not so pretty pictures may not. Especially if more of the audience can't see/feel a difference between 60fps or 120fps or faster. And may not even have a TV that can show these faster frame rates.
Last edited:
- 3,802
This doesnt fly with me. Saying it costs more to get great graphics with 60FPS, or likely 120fps next gen. Doesnt say how that translates to costing more money. Sure maybe if it takes more time to produce. They are just gonna try to see how far they can rinse gamers like when they introduced microtransactions.
I know some people might think the games haven't changed price for 20 years, but have you considered we were just being ripped off 20 years ago? 70 pounds for virtual F1 on megadrive in the 90s for example. I wont be paying over 40 for any game. Which is a fair price imo for a non finished product, as always.
https://www.gamesindustry.biz/amp/2...ve-to-think-costs-remain-the-same-on-next-gen
I know some people might think the games haven't changed price for 20 years, but have you considered we were just being ripped off 20 years ago? 70 pounds for virtual F1 on megadrive in the 90s for example. I wont be paying over 40 for any game. Which is a fair price imo for a non finished product, as always.
https://www.gamesindustry.biz/amp/2...ve-to-think-costs-remain-the-same-on-next-gen
Last edited:
- 3,781
- Brisbane, Australia
- Chameleon9000
This is a complete miss-think. First of all, the video games industry is a business. The whole point is to make a profit with a product. You aren’t owed any part of it, and that means you aren't owed a product for less than the company wants to sell it for. Thats like saying to ferrari “your cars are rip offs because you're selling Them for more than the sum of its parts are actually worth”. Thats just not how it works. The value of a product is entirely set by the demand for the product. If a company can make more of a profit by selling their games for 20 dollars more, then they are absolutely going to. If, however, they think they can make more money by selling it for cheaper, and therefore selling more copies, then they will do that too.
In the current generation, however, the highest single value of a standard video game has been $60 US. So, they have looked to gain more revenue through other schemes, such as micro transactions and insane limited edition bundles. If these schemes didn't exist, then the video game market simply would not be as big as it is today. There simply wouldn’t be anywhere near as much money in the industry, which would lower production values.
You might argue that most games don’t need insanely high production values anyway, and yes, perhaps not. Thats why we have indie games. You don’t have to buy the biggest and baddest branded video games, but they exist because there is a huge market for them, and they keep getting bigger and bigger because people are willing to fund them.
Despite all that, it is obvious to anyone that the micro transaction thing has gotten completely out of hand, and in a lot of cases is predatory in nature and exploitative. However, gamers have caught on to this, and we have started slamming the crap out of everything that includes them, for better or for worse.
So, because you can only go so far with micro transactions before people start railing you on the internet for it (and rightfully so), companies must look for other methods of increasing revenue. So, they increase the price.
It is comedically unfair to say that these companies should just give you a nice $60 game with no MTX and just leave you alone from there. That is just not how business works. Again, it would be like knocking on Ferrari's door and Demanding that they give you an 812 superfast for the same price they used to sell the 550 because “that would just be fair man”.
Another common miss-think that people tend to make is to think that all these video game companies are just raking in the dough at your expense, and every time they sell a game theyre going to the bank, printing out your 60 bucks and shoving it their pockets. Sure, the biggest games companies have some rediculously rich CEOs, but have you not noticed how many video game companies that made great games even 10 years ago have been brutally torn apart by the last few generations? Thats because this industry is as cutthroat as it gets. You simply can’t make a profit off selling a giant big budget AAA game for 60 bucks. Pretty much the only developers left are either the ones doing the predatory MTX crap or they're directly funded by the ones who are. It simply is not just free money.
Lets take, for example, Bungie. You may hate Destiny 2, but it has been no secret that that game has been enormously successful for bungie. They have sold heaps of “overpriced” expansions, and MTX, and store merch, and more. But despite all that, ever since they split from Activision, they have been quite open with the community that they do not have quite the same capacity to pump out content at the same scale they once could. They might genuinely see financial disaster if any of their products fails to sell as many units or MTX as they'd hope, and it could cause the death of the company now that they have no safety net. All of this in spite of them using just about every “dirty money printing trick” in the book to “steal all your hard earned cash”
Anyways, rant over. I genuinely believe that a price hike on games is nothing but a good thing. Sure, it is not going to stop companies from shoving MTX and trying to make more money, but it could definitely give developers the option to not include them and still make money.
- 3,802
Not a miss think a all, £70 for a game is a lot, and for games that will be rushed out in an unfinished state no less. Also you're totally right about that a company can sell a product for what it chooses to, and I can decide if I think it's a fair value or not. As is it stands I've decided i will vote with my wallet and my wallet says nay. Only way I'd consider paying 70 is if it's a game I know I'm going go play for at least half the cycle of the console.
When PS1 games were launched they were 40-50 quid, that was nearly half of my weekly wages on a 38 hour week. So as I said, maybe we were just being ripped off then rather than publishers simply freezing the prices for 25 years. How come bluray movies that cost hundreds of millions to make dont cost 70 quid? How come ACC was 35 quid on release, with expensive licences and to a niche market? Yet Dirt5 will cost more on this gen.
Not even comparable in the slightest. For a physical product such as a Ferrari, your fee covers costs of materials, an 812 uses more advanced and expensive materials than the 550. With games you dont have to make each and every game. It just one game printed to relatively cheap discs ( in comparison to carbon fibre for example) or a digital download. All I see is an excuse by some devs to mark up games. Release finished games without big bugs before you mark up,the fees. No doubt codies will also use all of dirt5 assets for the entirety of their next gen titles too.
Where is the cut off point though? What if they have to start charging 150 quid to cover their rising costs? At which point no one will buy their games so they'll go broke. Maybe they're just not managing costs very well. Put things into perspective. Ian Bell said he hired 32 people for pcars to do the job Stefano Casillo did all on his own. Granted Casillo is clearly a maniac, but maybe there are some big issues with developers and costs.
Last edited:
MagpieRacer
Premium
- 17,290
- Wymondham, Norfolk
- Seagull_Racer
I mean with the movies we don't go to cinemas and pay £10 per person to go and sit and play the game for 2 hours before its disc release a year later. So its a tricky comparison. Avengers Endgame for example cost $356 million to make and took nearly $2.8 billion at the box office. Made its money back over 4 times before it ever saw a disc.
ACC, as you pointed out is a niche market. It won't sell many copies at £35 so any higher would just be silly. We also don't know how much Kunos pay for their licenses and I would go as far as to say that its a long way from being the triple A title that Dirt 5 is pitched as. Dirt 5 is also pitched at a more widespread audience than ACC anyway. Plus it'll sell much better on PC and thats where most of its money will be made.
Not to mention Dirt 5 is the same price as any other current gen game anyway. So again not an ideal comparison but I know what you were trying to say.
Voting with wallets won't change the industry. These prices are the precedent and it would take a dramatic movement for that to change. The excitement for next gen is too powerful for that to happen. What will be interesting to me to see is whether the current gen versions increase in price. Given that there's a free upgrade path to next gen for most games, surely most peolle will just buy the games they want now in current gen prices. Like Dirt 5, Valhalla, Cyberpunk, WRC9 and so on.
ROAD_DOGG33J
Premium
- 14,216
- IL, USA
- holyc0w1
- holyc0w
Ultimately, everybody decides their own "rip-off point". If they see enough people holding back until a price drop, they may reconsider.
I don't really have a problem with it. I would like to see a bit more flexibility with pricing, which may actually happen.
I don't really have a problem with it. I would like to see a bit more flexibility with pricing, which may actually happen.
- 3,002
- Dundee, Scotland
A quick question for those of use in the UK that managed to get a pre-order in but more directed towards @Famine but anyone who ordered from Game UK had an email advising they might not get their pre-order until 2021?
Haven't received one myself but am preparing myself for some "disappointment"
Haven't received one myself but am preparing myself for some "disappointment"
Similar threads
