Sony CEO on PS5: 'We Do Not Need to Aggressively Sell the Console' - News
by William D'Angelo , posted on 01 September 2026 / 9,839 Views
Sony President and CEO Hiroki Totoki speaking with The Wall Street Journal said they were lucky that the storage and memory shortages that have caused prices to skyrocket occurred during the latter half of the PlayStation 5 lifecycle rather than earlier on.
PlayStation is now more focused on recurring revenue from the current userbase rather than trying to sell as many consoles as possible.
"It is lucky, you know, we are in the latter half of the lifetime cycle of a PS console," said Totoki. "That means that we do not need to aggressively sell the console today. And rather than that, we're focusing on recurring revenue from the current, you know, the user base.
"And already our PS have more than 125 million MAU today. And how to monetize from the users is quite important for us."
Sony has shipped 95.3 million PlayStation 5 consoles as of June 30, 2026.
A life-long and avid gamer, William D'Angelo was first introduced to VGChartz in 2007. After years of supporting the site, he was brought on in 2010 as a junior analyst, working his way up to lead analyst in 2012 and taking over the hardware estimates in 2017. He has expanded his involvement in the gaming community by producing content on his own YouTube channel and Twitch channel. You can follow the author on Bluesky.
More Articles
Good luck with the ps6
They won't need to aggressively sell PS6 either lol
They do,sort of
they will.... the model doesn't work without a user base.
Sony will just treat the PS6 userbase as an extension of the PS5 userbase. With the component prices the way they are these days, launching a new console and ditching the old one is over
I'm not wishing them any luck, except bad luck. The only good thing about the component price situation is what it'll make things harder for Sony too.
Its sarcasme
Keep it up, the consumer isn't blind.
Sadly consumers are insanely passive, specially gamers.
I believe the biggest issue is the lack of better options...
PC: Hands down the best platform of all, the only true other option ATM, but.... you need to be able to build and manage a PC; it’s not for everyone. Plus, the initial investment is considerably higher.
Nintendo: It offers a different experience. Third-party support is far inferior, the type of exclusives is different, and games rarely get significant discounts—if they get any at all. A Nintendo machine usually doesn't replace a PlayStation.
Xbox: They lost their way. There is a whirlwind of uncertainty and problems surrounding Xbox.
PlayStation:
Top-tier third-party support.
The most critically acclaimed/Rewarded lineup of exclusives on the market.
A better entry price than PC.
Ease of use for all users.
Store with sales and big discounts that, sometimes, can even Rival Steam to a certain point.
PlayStation is just too good and strong, they knows how to make a home console. It’s no coincidence that their lowest-selling console sold over 80 million units, while their best-selling one surpassed 160 million.
I hope some chinese company will enter console market (Looking at you Tencent!!)
I hope they can deliver a amazing console that will crush competition, just like Eletric cars that are dominating the market.
A gaming pc for casual and even big gamers is by far NOT the best option.
How much does a pc cost to make nowadays?
Building a pc comparable to ps5 pro can be done for 1.25k as an RTX4060 is roughly on par with PS5 pro. AMD GPU might be even cheaper.
So
325 euro GPU
275 euro RAM (16 GB)
100 euro for motherboard
100 euro for decent CPU
200 euro for SSD
250 euro for cooling, case and PSU
But hey Online is free and Steam can be cheaper, although a good monitor, mouse and keyboard isn't
You nail the point. I would also add a good controller.
200 for a ssd? Which one 1 tb? Lol yout just made my whole point. If you wanne get into pc gaming make sure your pc is strong af or just stick with a console..
A 1TB one is plenty with decent internet. However if 1.250 euro is the entry price it is still quite a bit more expensive than a PS5 pro, unless you want a pre build.
The 4060 is a 15 tflop card, which is basically the same as the 16.7 tflop PS5 pro GPU. The 4060 has access to DLSS 3 and unlike the PS5 pro a gaming pc has other RAM than VRAM and a modern $100 CPU is far better than what the PS5 Pro has. So a RTX4060 gaming pc should perform very close to a PS5 pro.
TFLOPS is not really a comparable figure here as RDNA2 does not equal Ada architecture, and even if it only means theoretical max performance by multiplying CUDA cores x frequency. 4060 has a very narrow 128 bit bus which puts it close to Series S bandwith. Not to mention an 8GB buffer... Digital Foundry seems to agree with me on that one. They generally put it at around base PS5 level of performance with some games running better on 4060 and some on Sony's hardware. Unfortunately, new titles like 007 First Light seem to have issues matching PS5 performance more and more often and I'm not sure which 100 euro CPU could get you stable 60 in say Halo Campaign Evolved and other heavier UE5 titles. I'm a PC gamer myself but your statement is simply false.
True, the entry price is a tall barrier, and you need skills to deal with "PC problems". PC isn't for everyone, sadly.
Why would you want a Tencent console? Such a horrible company.
But the point is, when companies start pulling shit on consumers, they just roll over and take it, even as without consumers those companies can't do anything, they still let them boss them around as if they are hostages to it.
Tencent or any other Chinese company is fine...
I just want I strong new Challenger to put fire on the market. Kinda like Xbox 360.
Competition and fear of losing your customers is something Sony really is needing right now, indeed.
Very true.
Same goes for Nintendo.
Outside of money hatted 3rd party exclusives which is drastically changing year on year. What exactly does PS do better then the competition? Nintendo excels at 1st party content, Xbox excel at online services like GamePass, PC Excel at pretty much everything, PS Excel at.. the controller?
As I’ve said before, the PC is a platform that requires care and maintenance from the user. It isn't for everyone.
Xbox is in a confusing situation. We don't know if the platform will have permanent exclusives, what the future holds for Game Pass, or how the Xbox-PC integration will play out... On top of that, the console is more expensive than the PS5. You can see it in the sales figures; Xbox is in a state of disarray, and consumers are right not to put their faith in MS.
As I’ve said before, Nintendo offers a different kind of experience. There isn't enough third-party support (you can't play games like Baldur's Gate 3, Expedition 33, or GTA VI...), and the type of exclusive titles is different.
Regarding Sony's quality... I listed this in my post, but I’ll be more explicit:
2024 - Astro Bot | Final Fantasy VII Rebirth | Balatro
2023 - Baldur's Gate III | The Legend of Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom | Alan Wake II
2022 - Elden Ring | God of War Ragnarok | Immortality
2021 - It Takes Two | Resident Evil Village | Forza Horizon 5
2020 - The Last of Us Part II | Ghost of Tsushima | Hades
2019 - Death Stranding | Resident Evil 2 | Sekiro Shadows Die Twice
2018 - God of War (2018) | Red Dead Redemption 2 | Marvel's Spider-Man
2017 - The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild | Horizon Zero Dawn | Super Mario Odyssey
2016 - Uncharted 4: A Thief's End | Overwatch | Doom (2016)
2015 - The Witcher 3 Wild Hunt | Fallout 4 | Bloodborne
The list features the three most awarded games of each year.
Even if you personally dislike the games listed, the fact remains that this list objectively demonstrates the immense quality of Sony's titles.
It is a fact that PlayStation has been the most awarded publisher over the last decade, whether through its first-party studios or via partnerships with other studios.
Furthermore, Sony is also gaining support from former Xbox exclusives; titles such as Fable and Forza 6 have been confirmed for PS5.
Imho, ATM Playstation is in a very strong and dominant position, it managed to differentiate itself from other "where to play" options.
Does this list also include games that win minor awards: such as Best Strategy game etc? Also plenty dont play PS titles. Its more a preference, every platform has games for different tastes.
Also my main point is you mentioned a lack of "better options" I just gave you 3 examples of platforms offering superior features.
The options are there, and all options have advantages and library of content.
"We Do Not Need to Aggressively Sell the Console" = "We can afford to do 2 more price hikes in the near future ".
So true. lol
"How to monetize from the users is quite important for us."
I know this is obvious from any corporate perspective, but it's still surprising when it's said out loud lol. Now that discs will soon be out of the equation, how on earth can they further monetize the playerbase?
Well the obvious answer would be simply to release games that people want to buy... Another approach would be to release more faceplates that current owners may want. I would love a full transparent or blue translucent cover (like what Xbox is doing with the 25th anniversery model)
Definitely the most obvious, but he's referring to additional monetization. If they're not concerned about selling as many PS5's as possible, the PS6 is gonna be in the exact same boat with how much it's going to cost. And Sony knows PS6 isn't going to sell as well due to the cost. And coming off a generation that made Sony more money than any previous gen combined, and for the most part withdrawing from the PC market, standard game sales just aren't gonna cut it. Which I imagine is why there's such a push still for live service. And definitely a huge reason for going all digital here soon.
I can definitely see things like faceplates becoming more common, but you have to wonder if additional subscriptions will start to happen or what Xbox is trying with financing/leasing a console with interest. There are a huge number of possibilities, but I doubt any of them will be anything more than a detriment to just wanting to game.
Yeah, the guy is a dick head.
He's probably not exceptional, his company is just in a position where he can afford to be so open about it. Most people in his position probably have to think like that.
The focus on talking about monetizing the customer base in every single opportunity this year is so shameful.
We'll take as much money as possible from the ones already with us, screw them.
How was that the case between 2009 and 2025? I'll be honest I don't care for online, specially in that gen, but yeah, that was shit.
Starting with the PS3 Slim it was such such a great run up until now, both in hardware discounts, game discounts and the amount of great games they put pulled starting with Uncharted 2.
Their games were in the most affordable position ever around here tho, it was actually an insanely good steak up until this year, even until last year they were doing some absurd deals for Black Friday and ahead, despite the lack of price drops due to the several crisis happening all over the world, incredible games being so very cheap, physical btw, and the PS5 system massive discounted, even the PS5 Pro was going for R$ 4800 from the original R$ 7000 price around here, it was pretty much the best period ever for Playstation, at least around here.
Starting this year they just decided to fuck people as much as possible, even as that very long goodwill period has bring them the biggest profits they've ever had by a distant long margin. It's honestly still hard to believe.
Well, the online pass thing was definitely not a consumer-friendly move. Starting with PS4, online play has required PS+ whereas it was free on PS3. There's almost certainly no need for that - it's pure greed. The PS3 era was pretty good otherwise, but there was that early hint of something not good.
Other than that, the PS4 generation was pretty good though, but it's easy to not do much other customer-unfriendly stuff when you have a strongly growing platform with a subscription service that's being heavily pushed especially by online play. That PS+ requirement for online play isn't, of course, just a one-time thing - the change is, but the requirement is there all the time.
The PS5 generation has been terrible from the start. I don't think they've even tried to lower customer prices at any point because demand has been so high (and there have also been supply challenges due to several external factors). They've introduced more PS+ tiers, probably for increased profits. They've actually degraded the available models. They've tried pushing for more live service games. They haven't exactly shied away from raising prices. Most recently, they're announced the intention to kill off physical games. It's terrible.
As far as I see, it's a long-time trend that's been tremendously accelerated this gen. They had a lot of goodwill from me in the past, soured all that badly by their online pass adventure and the PS+ requirement for online play, but this gen they've lost 100% of all goodwill they still had.
Arrogant Sony is back and it only took 1 generation.
Yet they need to aggressively sell a digital only PS6. Good luck with that, PlopStation.
Don’t you just miss the PS2 days where a console was just a piece of hardware, that publishers could distribute games for (with a licencing fee, sure), and there was no talk of “active userbases” and “recurring revenue”.
There is hardly anything surprising in these comments, but that they are so blatant about it now, shows how incredibly arrogant they have become.
"[W]e're focusing on recurring revenue from the current, you know, the user base. ... And how to monetize from the users is quite important for us."
Well, yeah. If your user base drops by half next generation because the console costs $1000+ and you've alienated the people who still bought 80 million physical discs last fiscal year, you'll have to find some way of squeezing more revenue out of the people that are still left over. And with consoles increasingly becoming a luxury limited to higher-income people, they know those people with deeper pockets won't mind parting with a bunch of extra money for a gaming future that's more aggressively monetized than it already is. I could totally imagine $100 games with similar price hikes to PSN, first-party DLC, more pushes for live-service and subscriptions, and other ways to squeeze money from people.
The console market is in the most dire shape it's been in since 1983, and I'm not joking.
I don't think that 80 millionis accurate. In the last fiscal they sold 317.9 million game of which 78% were digital meaing that 69.938 million were physical. Its still a decent chunch (22%) but its not 80 million. Another way they can monotize the base would be to make their higher Plus tiers more attractive. Simply raising the price might have the oposite effect as shown by Xbox and the GP increase which resulted in fewer subs overall. Lets see if they are smart enough to balance what they want with want customers actually want.
Yeah. You're right. I was in a rush and didn't check my data set. It is indeed closer to 70M. Which is still a lot. The way some gaming companies are framing the situation, you'd think the decline in physical sales was like the decline in CD sales from 2000-2020, which is most certainly not the case. 70M is still a lot of units. Add in other platforms and we're talking at least 200M physical units sold from April 2025 to March 2026. That's still a lot of physical copies.
There's also other variables like the fact that big-budget "AAA" titles are released less frequently, and that relatively inexpensive digital-only titles are abundant. And companies count those differently. Sony includes digital-only games like retro titles and most indies in their unit sales. Meanwhile, Nintendo does not include digital-only games in their software shipment numbers, so that's why you get results like Nintendo selling over 21% more hardware units than PlayStation from April 2017 to March 2026, but over 36% fewer software shipments in the same nine-year period. With third parties, you get cases like Capcom including PC sales and GKCs in their digital shares. But when we actually get splits for specific games, we see much higher percentages of physical units for many retail-release titles than the overall numbers given would suggest. Most of Sony's own first-party titles were majority physical as recently as 2023, for example.
considering the revenue return though, 70m physical sales means that as long as they convert at least 50m of that to digital they are still coming ahead.
AKA, if thier sales decreases overall by less then 10% by ditching physical, they come out ahead finantially...
Considering the expected massive price of the PS6 and the alienation of millions of gamers who still buy physically (as recently as 2023, sales of most of their own first-party games were majority physical), I honestly doubt they're looking at at little as a 10% reduction. I'm thinking the entire market for conventional home consoles is declining 30-50% next generation.
People in the comment section are malding over these statements, as though he has said something offensive. But everything he’s said is accurate and reasonable. There is a component shortage that is expected to last through to the end of 2027 and the PS5 is in the later stretch of its lifecycle meaning they can shift toward a more software focused approach. This guy didn’t invent the console lifecycle (Nintendo was doing it decades ago), nor did he create the component shortage (that is the unexpected increase in demand from data centres).
For the short-term, he is correct. PS5 is essentially coasting its way right now to over 100 million units. And it will finish around or more than PS4 most likely.
But paying attention to customers and aggressively expanding the userbase will matter for PS6. If PS6 sells similarly or worse to PS3, Sony will need to aggressively focus on both PS5 and PS6.
I've been saying for a long time that sony were going to become increasingly aggressive in how they monetise users. Especially if the user base starts to shrink. It's a common business practice to slowly start monetising things that used to be free. Tinder is a prime example of this. An app that was completely free, that has over time monetised almost every single part of the app.
"And already our PS Plus have more than 125 million MAU today. " This can't be right. I think he means they have 125M MAU not 125M PS Plus MAU.
We won't need to aggressively buy the PS6, either
They cancel physical and now they want to cancel their own console. Throw in their terrible live service push and I believed Sony is a mess!!! Maybe it’s time for new leadership!!!
Well gamers don't need to buy PS6. Got it Totoki
His body is Japanese, but his soul is not.
I know how they will monitize the player base.
Increasing ps plus
Adss in games buy ps plus to remove them
Higher digital license prices(you do NOT buy a digital game,you rent the license)
More overpriced dlc
Overpriced consoles
Higher controller prices.
More microtransactions
Glad they feel that way, cuz they definitely won't be aggressively selling the PS6 given how much it's gonna end up costing.
