Such is the discourse among enthusiast gamers that Sony will either have to introduce an Xbox Game Pass competitor or Microsoft will have to pull the plug on its own before fans shut up about it. Despite breaking industry sales records, there’s a sentiment among the most engaged players on social media that PlayStation once again finds itself playing catch-up, and the big black cloud this time is its subscription services.
PS Plus, of course, is the biggest subscription service in the industry to date, with almost 50 million active members. It peaked at 47.6 million earlier this year, and the latest figures peg its paying audience at 47.2 million. The retention is excellent, and it’ll be seen by the organisation’s top brass in Tokyo as one of the firm’s most successful products. Still, the expectation from consumers is that the company could be doing more.
While efforts have been made to improve the meandering PS Now service, boss Jim Ryan and his suited subordinates would probably chalk it down as a failure. Introduced early in the PS4 era, Sony was actually at the forefront of the streaming wars, only to entirely cede its position and effectively become a footnote next to Google Stadia and xCloud. Even today it’s unavailable in most major territories, and we can’t imagine subscriber numbers are particularly high.
Thus the decision to merge subscriptions is a sound one, and something that’s seemingly been pondered internally for an eternity. A Bloomberg report this week cited documents seen by journalist Jason Schreier bringing confirmation to the murmurs, but this is not really new information. Based on said paperwork, Sony will introduce a tiered system, whereby the existing benefits of PS Plus are offered as a base option, and then extras are layered on top. Sony’s decision not to discount annual subscriptions of PS Now during its Black Friday promotions suggests changes are almost certainly afoot within the next 12 months.
From a marketing and branding perspective, focusing on the wildly popular PS Plus and then attempting to upsell subscribers makes total sense; the problem lies in what exactly Sony intends to offer in its premium options. It sounds like the second tier will be an expansion of the existing PS Plus Collection, with free monthly games and online play alongside a growing catalogue of PS4 software – eventually expanding to include PS5 titles as well.
The third, meanwhile, allegedly throws in the kitchen sink: streaming (like with the current PS Now), extended game demos, and access to a library of classic games. It’s the first we’ve heard of Sony revisiting some of the software from its past platforms since its short-lived (and, frankly, embarrassingly basic) PS2 to PS4 initiative, so it’s hard not to feel sceptical here. Is the organisation really in the business of bringing back old PS3 and PSP games, after treating them with contempt for so long?
And then, of course, there’s the elephant in the room: Xbox Game Pass’ primary selling point, day-one first-party games, will not be included. That means, even if you’re a subscriber to the top tier, you’ll still be shelling out Sony’s extortionate new price point of $70 to pick up a copy of Horizon Forbidden West and God of War Ragnarok at launch, as you always have. These games sell extraordinarily well, so you can’t blame PlayStation (and, indeed, Nintendo, a company conveniently always excluded from these conversations) for sticking to a tried-and-trusted business model – but the comparisons are unlikely to be favourable.
Sony would, probably, argue that this isn’t about competing with Xbox Game Pass, but is instead about adding value to its own current crop of subscriptions – baloney! PS Now needs reinventing, of that there’s no doubt, but this company isn’t stupid and it knows comparisons will be drawn like they already are. Introducing a new slate of subscriptions which don’t, on the surface, offer the same value as Microsoft’s membership model is a recipe for disaster – just look at the reaction to the recent expansion to Nintendo Switch Online.
It feels like Sony (and, again, Nintendo) are caught between two business models – but half-arsing it is not the right approach. Microsoft continues to argue Xbox Game Pass is a sustainable and successful initiative, but when your pockets are as deep as the billion dollar “underdog” (which, make no mistake, is what it’s marketing itself as), pretty much any path is viable – it just depends how much you’re willing to spend.
PlayStation is not short of a dollar or two either, of course, and it has the underlying infrastructure and first-party software to make an alternative work – but it seems like it’s hesitant to go all-in. Effectively, the company wants to have its cake and eat it too – and consumers will see through that all day long.
We’ll need to wait and see what this new set of services, codenamed Spartacus, officially bring. It does feel like the right time for a rebrand, and there’s no doubt there’s money to be made for Sony here. But the comparisons will be loud and if the new tiers fail to make a strong first impression, then it’ll be back to the drawing board once more. There are interesting times ahead, then – but it’s hard not to be sceptical of what’s being touted right now.
What are your thoughts on the current PS Plus and PS Now reports? What do you think Sony needs to do to successfully reinvent these services, and what kind of content would convince you to upgrade your subscription? Spend wisely in the comments section below.
Comments 132
The ps1.ps2.ps3. And psp games is what im mostly interested.playing my third favorite franchise ever in syphon filter and my 4th favorite franchise ever in resistance will be amazing.word up son
Like the article says, there are a lot of factors that Sony needs to get right. Pricing is obviously the big one — surely if it's going to introduce a new tiered subscription, the base price of PS Plus has to drop?
However this goes, it's going to be a fascinating watch, and will be a big indicator of how "out of touch" Sony really is with PlayStation fans.
Hopefully Jim and the gang get it right!
I am a bit interested, but also against it. It also need content to back it up. Especially if the price goes up with it, as im suspecting. You can't just add 10-15 games, then wait months before changing them (this goes for PS1/2/3/PSP as well). Playstation Plus Collection was released with PS5 and it still has the same games. Nothing has changed there, which is what im honestly afraid of this new service is gonna do as well.
Hopefully they are doing tiers.
That said, I probably won't get it myself cause I don't like the whole Game Pass thing. Prefer owning my games and not just renting them. But its fair do to the people who don't care.
Nowadays I'm more impressed by playing stuff like GTA IV and Skate 2 again than any other underwhelming and uninspired crap that comes out.
Sign me up
Looking forward to seeing the pricing...
The only way big Sony Studios games will be released Day One on a subscription service is if these are single player games in name only and are just the launch pad for online play and MTXs.
If that's the case then I'd prefer to actually buy a complete game (I know, how boomer of me 😛) and keep it in my library.
The alternative would be to charge more than Xbox currently do and again, many on here wouldn't be happy with that.
10 years ago I'd have a lot of faith in this new service, but nah, with the current regime I am not holding my breath on something too positive.
I have zero confidence that Sony won't have attach some major caveats to this, especially that alleged highest tiered subscription. If I'm unable to natively download those classic games, this service doesn't interest me at all.
No doubt this is a ‘boot to the throat’ move upon micro$oft (aka microshaft) no doubt!!!
It all really depends on pricing. Nintendo’s expansion pack for NSO is way overpriced, I expected it to be 10-15 more not 30. From what we’ve heard with the 3 tiers, this could get very expensive very fast.
“ That means, even if you’re a subscriber to the top tier, you’ll still be shelling out Sony’s extortionate new price point of $70 to pick up a copy of Horizon Forbidden West and God of War Ragnarok at launch, as you always have. ”
LMAO! No. I’ll do as I always have and wait for them to drop to a reasonable price or, if it seems likely, come to the new service after a few years. In the interim, I’ll have hundreds of games to play on the service, not to mention the choice to pick up select games second hand for peanuts.
The only people who need to pick up games at launch are kids with no jobs or spouses/family taking up their time. Nobody else could possibly keep up with all the new releases.
I doubt it'll be anywhere near as good a deal as GamePass.
As far as I'm concerned it all comes down to the games that'll be on offer (as well as pricing, of course). I never had a PS3/2/1, so there's plenty in those libraries that I'd be interested in. In fact I was thinking of buying a PS3 for cheap, but might hold off on that if what this offers is good enough.
Shell out $70? Cries in £
@thefourfoldroot Sure, fair enough, but you get what I mean. If you want to pay at launch you'll be paying, and there's no guarantee they'll be added to any tier of PS Plus in a timely timeframe.
At a minimum the need to merge the two services. They already have the infrastructure to add more PS3 games for streaming so even without native support the streaming overall is pretty solid now. Emulation for PS1, PS2 and even PSP even natively on PS4 won't be an issue and even if they were to just start with all of their own published games I can't see how it would be a bad selling point since many of those games people many have never played.
I really fear people are getting ahead of themselves with the PS1, PS2, PS3, and PSP stuff. Sony has shown zero interest in bringing back these titles, and now suddenly they're going to have a rich selection of classics from years past?
Seems incredibly farfetched to me.
If ps3 ps2 ps1 game doesn't run native, it's going to be a big disappointment. I don't want to use the cloud. pc Emulate is better choice.
Well, Sony currently really is into making more multiplayer crap and "directors cuts" that all come with extra revenue streams...unfortunately.
So giving their games away in a subscription should at that point have a build in revenue stream to get more money from the sheep's.
@get2sammyb
True, but nor do they need to be. Not as long as they don’t charge stupid prices. The point of a subscription service is that it gives the choice of hundreds of games; that’s completely contrary to the need for new releases to be added same day. The people who might need that are the people without sudden access to a huge games catalogue surely 🤷♂️
Although I'm not expecting Sony to match Xbox with included day one exclusives, I would like to see perhaps a permanent discount to all Sony exclusives if signed up, perhaps 25% off making a £70 game a more reasonable £50 or so.
The PS1, PS2, PS3 stuff would be nice to have to dabble in occasionally (I do like to enjoy the nostalgia of old classics), but I'll probably focus on new games for PS5.
I think if they are going to get a subscription service why not offer them separately and allow the customer to pick and choose what they want; as a tier system sounds quite pricey. For instance I subscribe to PS Plus but PS Now doesn't interest me and I think endeavours like it such as Gamepass in the long run are harmful to the Devs. So I would say a PS Plus sub and a "PS Classics" sub which offers the PS1-3 games with things like trophy support would be great.
I think in that sense PS are losing the console war, they've got a treasure trove of classic titles which if they granted access would be a huge money maker. Also they need to start thinking more ambitious. Instead of lamenting the loss of Devs such as Bethesda and their titles, why not think "hmm well let's get one of our own studios to develop our own versions of Elder Scrolls/Fallout".
PS4 gen was a big win for Sony but they can't afford to rest on their laurels, so hopefully this new service if done right will give them an edge.
@thefourfoldroot I don't know, from what I observe with Game Pass the biggest appeal of that service is the day one games. Obviously it's not the only appeal, but it seems to be the main thing getting people through the door.
@Futureshark A large discount on first-party games for top tier subscribers could be an option, but I think it would need to be significant.
However, it still creates a heavily unfavourable comparison, even though I think I personally would welcome it.
I don't care about this type of services i like to pay full price for what i want but let's say they do what rumours say, people still don't understand that xbox can do all this things because MS has all the money in the world and Sony won't be able because spoiler alert they don't have all that money? If they make something fair for the money they can invest in playstation (outside the money sony still loses making phones and other things) and people still bitch about it well ... "nada les encaja" ( no di*k fits them).
All i want is to be able to play games online and buy games via the store when cheap..i can understand why this kind of service is attractive to people so i hope its worth it for them...for me ps+ is more than good enough..
Sony has no intention of competing with Game Pass. Its intention is to make proper use of PS Now as opposed to dumping it. One thing this site continues to do is misinterpret Sony's desire to make more money as the desire to beat out the competition. This site also seems to think that Sony (or Nintendo for that matter) is deeply motivated to avoid negative comparisons. Sony can't beat Xbox at services but it doesn't need to. It needs to make the best of its position. Day and date can't be sustained for Sony because it can't manage years of losses unlike Xbox. But what Sony can do is follow its traditional model along with a derivative, inferior version of Game Pass to great success. The idea that disaster awaits for doing the (typical for Sony) approach of half-assing a copy of the competitor's idea is ridiculous. Sony has done this many times with PSN, PS Plus, and Playstation Move. Sony will be fine. The real question is after the latest round of "Sony can't afford to do X." followed by Sony affording to do it, will this site stop writing its articles in such hyperbolic and fatalistic prose.
Microsoft is 30 times the size financially of Sony. Anyone expecting or wanting an exact like for like service is either not being realistic or just want Sony's downfall. A race to the bottom would see Sony exhaust all its income and Microsoft would still be about the same size as it always was. Microsoft is not the little friendly saviour, this is all out about closing competition and leveraging itself to make even more money with every interactive entertainment transaction on the planet. There comes a point when the sheer scale of money you have can only be spent on stopping others making money.
If it's a tiered system then I would think one tier would be the same as PS+ is right now, then one tier would be to include EVERY game (including Vita!) that PS+ has ever offered, and then another tier would be to include the huge back catalogue (I'm not sure what order these tiers would be, mind you!). Although I wonder if they would make all these games available day one, or just add 10-20 games a month. I think both PS+ and PSNow are great services, so combining them would be great. If the cost of these services combined is cheaper than they are now, surely that would be a win-win?
From my perspective, I only have PS+ because I have to subscribe to get full access to the full content of the games I want to play. Its 'criminal' that I must have PS+ to even play some games let alone the others that have a significant online component. The 'sweetener' to this is that I at least get a 'few' games a year I might enjoy as well as 'features' I get as standard on Xbox.
I felt very similarly towards Xbox Live Gold too of course but the reason I subscribed to Game Pass Ultimate is that for the money, its incredibly good value. It includes Gold, EA Play etc and on top of that, Day 1 access to brand new releases and not 'just' 1st Party. All that for just £11 a month. That's just an extra £5 more a month than PS+ (based on 'official' pricing - not the best price available if you shop around)
Do the maths, £132 a year but get all the benefits of Gold (although the 'free games' are not as appealing to me as PS+ still very similar service and sales discounts), EA Play, Streaming games to Mobile/PC/Console (great if you want to try something without having to wait for downloads, play on the go or across multiple devices etc), Savings on Purchases/DLC (extra on GP games) as well getting access to numerous games on Day 1. MLB21, Outriders and Back 4 Blood for example would cost me more to play Day 1 let alone Flight Sim, FH5, Halo Infinite etc.
The fact that I don't have to buy games like FH5, Halo:Infinite, B4B on day1 etc means that I could buy games like GotG, FC5 etc - no way could I buy all of these Day 1. According to the GQ interview, Game Pass Subscribers spend 50 per cent more than non-subscribers. A game’s average engagement goes up eight times when added to Game Pass. And player experimentation within genres dramatically increases. Three years after release, Sea Of Thieves just passed 25 million players, and that continues to grow.
I can understand this because I am playing games I wouldn't if I had to buy first, the Money I am 'saving' by not buying the games Day1 is still going on 'gaming' - maybe more Digital 'extras' (DLC etc) for those games and unlikely to buy a 'Physical' copy when I get a decent 'extra' discount for being a GP subscriber. I bet Sea of Thieves would of struggled to get 3-5m sales, yet has over 25m players. FH5 passed 10m in the first week - how many people played R&C? Returnal?
Whether Sony do go down this route or not, at the end of the day, it has to offer 'Value'. Like I said, I pay £11 a month for GPU but get a LOT more 'value' to me than I spend out. At the moment, I begrudgingly pay for PS+, finding the 'best' price I can refusing to pay Sony's price just so I can play all the content on Games I've already paid £50+ to play. I already know I'll get 'great' value from GP in 2022 - Starfield, Redfall, STALKER2, A Plague Tale: Requiem. It would cost me 'more' to play these without GPU and would still need 'Gold' too.
From what I see, I am not seeing anything from Sony that offers anywhere near this Value to me, but time will tell...
Who the hell pays full price for any game nowadays? Stuff goes on sale mere weeks after release. There is literally no need to do so. People who lack the patience to wait for a sale are the customers driving prices upwards by allowing companies to gouge us for incomplete titles.
Forget the Ps1,Ps2,Ps3, Vita and Ps4 games just give me brand new AAA Ps5 releases and I’m in
Obviously everybody wants great games for cheap. But, in the end somebody has to pay for the work (programming, graphic design, motion capture, musicians, actors writers). If the games are offered for cheap on a service then either development costs have to be reduced i.e. lower quality, shorter length, the player base needs to be expanded, or the subscribers are "tricked" into in game purchases. It is highly unlikely that MS's gamepass in its current state is profitable. It is more likely that it is subsidised under the promise to expand the player base to hundreds of millions of players, which does not sound like a realistic goal to me. Hundreds of millions of players play candy crush (i.e. mobile games you get for free or pennies) but not forza or halo.
The other problem with such services is that it reduces the influence of players. The content is curated by the service provider. Subscribers are likely not searching outside of their bubble. Thus, games which are not on the service will have a hard time to compete, which may give the provider too much power.
"There are interesting times ahead, then – but it’s hard not to be sceptical of what’s being touted right now." My thoughts exactly.
Can you download now games? Not really interested in streaming them.
This needs to be 5, 10 and 15 a month for the three tiers. Any more and it would be a disaster. Pay 60 a year for the normal plus, 120 for the second tier like gamepass without the online added. Then 180 a year for the third tier, like gamepass ultimate.
@get2sammyb I think you're totally correct with the PS1, PS2, PS3 and PSP games. The 'selection' on Now is mostly total garbage with barely any decent 3rd party titles so what's the point unless Sony are going to release a whole raft of titles for digital consumption?
The PS3 appears to be proving to be a difficult beast that even the monolithic PS5 can't emulate so the Now part of the sub is going to be streaming only (unless Sony have a PS1/2 emulator ready to go? No, didn't think so)
At this point in time,you'd be better off finding an original phat PS3 and use it for the PS1, 2 & 3 titles.
@MetalGear_Yoshi Yeah but not the ps3 games.
I'm definitely interested, but I somewhat doubt that the service will make it to my country considering that we don't have access to Playstation Now.
If they don’t include first party games day one, it’s not a GamePass competitor but just a glorified way of forcing players to pay for both, PSN+ and PSNow.
It’s like if Netflix put all their movies on thrashers, and then for rental, only to include them in their streaming service 2 years later (for a temporary window!)…
Before they try to compete they need to understand the actual reason these subscription services are a hit.
This is definitely exciting. Too early to say if I'm gonna sign up for this though. Most of all it depends on the game library, but also the price.
Im super interested if they add trophies to the classic games like they did with the PS2 to PS4 initiative.
I would be happy With a good backcompat system with FPS boost and resolution boost like on Xbox.
The thing is xbox needed gamepass to be relevant this gen and bring more players to their games as in retail their games don't sell no where near the amount of playstation and nintnedo games. I mean Mario kart 8 deluxe has sold more copies than Microsoft sold xbox one consoles lol
There's also a reason the biggest third party devs don't put thier games on gamepass day one, il let you try figure why...
The only ones so far being day one or close to day one are mainly multiplayer orientated which gamepass helps keep the user base up
PlayStation games sell very very well and they have no need to add their games to the service (although I wouldn't mind)
It all sounds a little vague, and concerning the back-compat, also a little unbelievable. Regardless, anything Sony does to improve their subscription offering has my interest, if what it offers is value and afforable though, is what will convince me to uptier. Otherwise ill stick with Game Pass and buying firstpparty at a discount.
Budget tier for me, thanks. Better yet just make cloud saves and online free so I don't have to pay anything on top of my internet access.
@ShogunRok "the base price of PS Plus has to drop?"
Does it? $50 PS+ on PS3 was great, games 2x a month, themes, avatars, and online was free, making PS+ optional, so people paid for the game rentals. Now it's $60 MANDATORY for online with 50mil subscribers. How many of those 50m are paying b/c it's optional, how man b/c they have to pay to play online?
They could go the Nintendo route, PS+Online for $40 including cloud saves, $90 for PS+Now and $120 for PS+Now& Forever for 3 gen of old games, but I think they'll keep PS+ $60 price b/c they probably sold 20 million 1 year subscriptions while it was $39.99 all week long. No point lowering it now, it's mandatory. Just a matter of how much more they charge for Now and N&F add-ons.
It should save them some money backend not needing 2 separate billing services and marketing teams when they roll Now into PS+ so they should be able to be competitive with Gamepass. Curious how they do it but shouldn't be too hard, shut down Now, let people pay for the add-ons to their current subscriptions.
They'll find a way to screw it up though. 😉
I hope Sony and Playstation come up with some better support for whatever they decide. Sony has 50 million PS+ members paying $60yr, that's $3 BILLION w/ a B dollars per year.
50m people paying $3Byr and PS+ doesn't have an email address or even a dedicated Twitter handle. Yes you can contact general Playstation help but I think that many customers paying that much money should get a little specific attention. Imagine if you has a problem with Disney+ and you had to call Disney World amusement park to get help?
You're lucky Tasuki quit, he'd have you bang to rights for that brave headline!
To be fair it makes sense, I don't know if the PS Now stats are public but I can't imagine it's even a quarter of ps plus numbers. For good reason, too. I tried the first red dead redemption and it is stream only. On one of the biggest titles why on earth would you keep it to the lowest quality possible?
If Sony can recognise and sort out their greed, they could not only overtake Game Pass but set a new standard.
I don’t think they will include big first party titles day 1. Funny people compares this to gamepass. I mean look at the gap of first party games coming to gamepass. They only release 1 game so far since the Xbox new gen launch. Almost all of new games come day 1 to gamepass are indie games. The other problem is Sony focus a lot on single player story games which wouldn’t make sense to offer free day 1.
Frankly, I’m not going to chastise Sony for not being unable to offer as good a deal as Gamepass. It’s a service only a company with endlessly deep pockets can provide, and that’s not Sony. But yeah, they need something better than what they’ve currently got going. Much better.
Sony is adding a PS Plus and PS Now subscription bundle that's what everyone wanted. Right? Now it's not enough some people want so much more. Seems crazy to me when they could just add both the their cart and buy them as a bundle already!
PS Plus was on sale in the USA this year for 39$ was it not on sale in the UK? Jumping from $40-$60 a year, to something like Xbox's $180 a year is a jump I will not make. I would use that money to buy games I want to play. Heck I bought 5 Physical games on black Friday for $110! Three of them were PS5 games and one was Guardians of the Galaxy. It's easy to top game pass ultimate just buying your own games for less.
I suspect given the steep sale on PS Plus memberships in Black Friday, that the base price point will be around $40 per year. Maybe a 40-50-60 model? If so, I’ll probably go with the highest tier access to everything. Unfortunately it might be 40-60-80. In which case, I hope that existing PS Plus subscribers get grandfathered into the mid tier at least.
I can’t help but feel given I already pay for both, and I mostly pay for now for the ps3 games, that I’m going to end up paying more. I’m not looking forward to this change.
@Th3solution I could see them going $100-$110 for both plus and now but no way will you get both for $50!
@oconnoclast It's not a matter of affording them. I can afford a $70 game. It's just dumb considering most games release in need of multiple patches, lacking content, etc.
I much prefer to wait for the proverbial dust to settle and when it does, even well performing games can be had for $15-20 easily. Why pay more for less? It rewards the exact ***** type of practices that the industry is plagued with.
Just better third parties and indies than what they have been adding to Plus would already be enough for me. Microsoft has been killing with third party releases straight to Game Pass, Sony needs to run after those deals as well.
There is 25% off PS Now 12 month sub, at 38.99 sterling in UK ps store. It's been there since midnight. I tried buying it but it says 'this item currently unavailable' every time.
I thought it was for first time customers only. So I actually disagree with the article about ps now lack of discount going on forward just to confirm a merge.
On Xbox there are 3 options. Xbox Live Gold, Game Pass and Game Pass Ultimate which combines the two so a discounted combo for PlayStation would be nice especially if they have the PS1 to PS3 bells and whistles.
Excited about this potentially happening. Hoping they do it properly and wont be "Sony"..
Giving away all of your products - which can cost hundreds of millions each - is not a sustainable business model. To this day Microsoft has yet to make a profit with it's Xbox brand.
Gamepass is their latest attempt, and I don't think it's a coincidence that they've never released information about how much money it makes.
I wouldnt get you hopes up my betting
£6.99 Tier 1 PS+
£9.99 Tier 2 and ps4 downloads that are already on psnow
£12.99 Tier 3 streaming ps3 games that are already available
I think it's an odd and curated narrative to say Sony is playing catch up. They've consistently sold more consoles, games, and subscriptions than Xbox for almost a decade.
@JohnKarnes Haha, well I can dream! 😃
So you’re thinking maybe a $60-80-100 model? Buying both services at full price right now is $120 so I imagine $100 is possible. If the price goes up for both then they’ve accomplished nothing by changing things. Like the staff says, I do think this merging services will probably see prices go down for bundling. I’m not paying $110 for both. It’s ridiculous when I literally could have signed up for both services last week for $100. If it’s more than $100 then the whole thing is DOA, as it should be. (This is assuming they don’t add something else with the PSNow games besides “extended demos”).
And it’s important to note that the “mid-tier” sounds basically like an expanded version of what PS Plus subscribers have right now with the PS Plus Collection, which, again I bought a year for $40 last week. It all depends on what the “growing catalogue of PS4 games with PS5 games in the future” is going to be. Another 20 games from the old back catalogue? 5 games? 100 games? 1000 games? Will they cycle in and out or is “growing” mean permanent access? We won’t know until they announce but if Sony is reading the online feedback, hopefully they don’t try to float out what PS Plus already is and just add another 20 games to the PS Plus Collection and call it their “mid tier” and increase the sub price to $80.
That would suck because the mid tier is what I’m interested most in. I’ll not likely stream old gen games very much. So that’s where I’m hoping realistically that the mid tier is close to the current price, maybe as much as $20 more, depending on what this “growing library” is all about.
Ive never liked the idea of GamePass or anything like it because I care about games delivering the highest quality possible and that will NOT happen with GamePass. You may get a game that’s great here or there but it’s very unlikely. You already see games like Halo and Forza getting great cRiTiC reviews but if you scour various forums for people’s actual experiences those games are not that great. Halo’s multiplayer gameplay is fun but the experience is severely tarnished by it being built around the GaaS model and Forza’s AI is broken. I could keep going but this would turn into a book. As time goes there will be many more GamePass games that seem to be solid but will be tarnished by them being built around GaaS. I don’t like the idea of Sony following in their footsteps.
Sony absolutely outsold the Xbox last gen, and are doing the same currently but intend on copying Microsoft’s homework for whatever reason.
I can almost gaurentee that sony will mess this up. They will match the price of gamepass and offer less. They will promise extensive ps2-ps4 and it'll be an almost empty list.
The main point of this merge is to get more people streaming older titles making ps now more valuable? Then add some bloody games to it, they need to be out seeking and buying the rights to all of the older games then can they need to spend some cash so we will. Tons of ps3 games not on now that I'd love to play
PS Now does need to improve. The lack of PS5 games is of particular note. It doesn't have day one releases, either, but it is half the cost of Game Pass, so I never expected that. Merging it into PS+ as a premium tier makes sense, but all they really need to do is add PS5 games (and PS5 versions of PS4 games that have them) and expand PS Now to more areas. It's really not as far behind Game Pass as the uninformed masses (most of which have never used PS Now) would have you believe.
Economically, Microsoft can afford to give away their games for pennies on the dollar, but I don't think Sony can. If everything went to a subscription model, get ready for lower quality games packed with microtransactions.
https://ibb.co/3vVJz85 12 months of PS Now for first time users is now 25% down on PS Store on PS5. Doesn't work via PS app.
Only applies to 12 month plan. Priced at 37.49£ for the first year and 49.99£ there after.
As someone that owns both consoles, and is a GamesPass Ultimate subscriber, I would only be interested in the PlayStation GamesPass if it included the big first-party games releasing day one on to the the subscription service.
Many of the smaller and Indie games that appear on the Xbox GamesPass currently, would likely also appear on the PlayStation GamesPass too. So, if you already own one subscription service (in my case, Xbox GamesPass) the only reason to own the other (the PlayStation version) would be for those games exclusive to the PlayStation. Obviously the same is true of either service, but as Xbox are already putting their own exclusives on their service, that's a massive reason for having their GamesPass. If Sony don't have their big exclusives go on to their GamesPass day one (as Xbox does) that leads to the only real draw to subscribing to the Sony Pass being their old and really old exclusive games, and then the question has to be asked; is that enough? For me, the biggest problem with the Xbox GamesPass is the lack of time I have to play the games on offer. The Xbox GamesPass does not have the issue that PS Now has whereby the better, newer games that do go on the service are removed after 3 months or so. Games on the Xbox GamesPass tend to stay on for 12 months or more, with the odd exception like GTA 5, which has hopped on and off a few times. My problem is that there literally are not enough hours in the day for me to get through all the games that are on offer on the Xbox GamesPass. So for me to subscribe to the Sony service as well, they would have to include their first-party games day one, otherwise, what would be the point? I just wouldn't get value from the service.
Ultimately, I'm not going to give up my superb value Xbox GamesPass, so if you want me to subscribe to the PlayStation GamesPass too you need to make it worth my while, and old and very old games just won't cut it for me...
I undertsand that Sony won't add their excluisve games day 1 as those games will sell really well so it wouldn't make any sense for them to do it. Would be great for us gamers if they did but they put money first.
I do hope they put some exlcuisves on it day 1. Maybe some smaller budget games and certainly multiplayer games. I also think they should at least add discounts for subscribers. The higher the tier, the bigger the discount for new releases of theirs.
Would also like to see 3rd party games go on day 1. Not just day 1 but try to get them on early enough that we aren't waiting years for it. I look at my collection and i think to myself, so many of these games are too long to have time to replay and others I just don't enjoy enough to want to play a second time. So rather than having to deal with trading in (for physical) or being stuck with it (digital), it would be nice to play those games on the service and only buy the games that we want to keep and replay another day. Being able to play them on the go from our phones would also be great! And if they make phone games the same way as they made PSP&Vita games, maybe add those to the service too. lol
Would also like to see them to increase the classics too. Try to get more on if they can.
I love the current PS Now, I’ve never streamed anything but just download them instead. Instead of getting 2 games a month with PS Plus I can get hundreds with PS Now. I don’t know why it isn’t more popular.
So that means they would expand it beyond the 19 countries the PS Now is available in!?
As long as its mostly great games and not the garbage indie crapathon that is game pass im in,if you look at the recently released section of game pass,most of the time its abysmal, filler games that I usually play while waiting for a ps5 game to download.
The thing that really irritates me about gamepass is that Microsoft's first party content is currently in no way comparable in quality to Sony, or even Nintendo.
It makes the argument that Sony and Nintendo should give away their games because Microsoft is seem ridiculous to me.
Well, forza looks pretty fun but that's about it.
I’m know I’m probably in the minority here but I don’t like how MS puts the latest games on Game Pass. In my mind it makes those games disposable. If I’m interested in a new game and paid full price for it, I’m playing that thing to completion and it stays proudly on my shelf (or on my hard drive) until I want to play it again but when I had Game Pass so many times I’d just play something for 1-2 hours, get bored, try something else, rinse, repeat. There’s no sense of true ownership with GP & in fact it’s not a million miles away from Microsoft’s original plan for the XB One that everyone absolutely hated. On the other hand if Sony come out and say my PS5 can play almost any Playstation game from the last 25 years for an extra £10 a month, take my goddamn money. New games not being on (I am) Spartacus doesn’t bother me but Sony is sitting on a goldmine of gaming history and should take full advantage of that. 👍
@Gaia093 you're right . when it comes to an idea that started on xbox first , playstations version/alternative usually isn't as good .
its still 100% better than having nothing though , so it is what is .
@HoodedSpirit no, you're not the only one. What makes PS stand out to me are their top tier first party games. If they were to put them day one on a sub service, that would have to come with a massive dip in development cost and therefore quality. And I don't want that. I'll happily pay full price if they keep continuing putting out those quality experiences. People talk a lot about value these days and only consider measurable quantities like the amount of games, playtime and price. But to me the most valuable currency is time well spent / enjoyment. And I'll pay for it.
hmmm.. i was guessing a while back they'd add ps now in with ps plus eventually. if they wanna keep people around, offer up ps1, ps2, ps3 and psp/vita games as well. not ALL, obviously, but select games that were standouts for their time.
gimme all that... i'll pay $100 a year, max. prefer 80. also, gonna have to have the latest games roll out as well... maybe not day-one, but within the first MONTH i'd like to see the latest games get added to this new subscription model. also, continue to offer the choice of downloading the games or streaming them. i'd rather DL them as streaming still has laggy controls and grainy picture quality.
but unfortunately.. all this leads to an eventual all-digital road. which, i DONT want gaming to go down that road. it'll lead to a dead end and no one's even discussing that scenario in the gaming world.
If access to the classic catalog is not half-assed then I wouldn't undersestimate its ability to stand against gamepass. Sony has way better classic IPs than xbox but they have to work with publishers in order to get the strong third-party titles.
I think making Plus more valuable is what they need to do for sure. But make Microsoft prove that Gamepass is more than just sustainable. It’s not even close to necessary to chase such an unproven business model. There’s a reason Xbox is so secretive and cryptic about the numbers and the games media won’t even bother asking simple questions about the subscription numbers. Such as, what is the current subscriber amount and what constitutes a subscriber?
No one can argue the value of Gamepass, but at this moment, only a company with pockets as deep as Microsoft can “sustain” this business model. Microsoft would love for Sony or Nintendo to chase this model because it would wipe them out.
We really don't know enough beyond the basic merging Plus/Now services & tiered levels rumours to have much of an opinion yet.🤔
For a lot of older PS owners the possibility of being able to play PS1/2/3 & possibly psp gen games sounds appealing. Though having seen games like Vice City Stories disappear off psn,& the current GTA "Definitive edition",being anything but with its culled soundtracks,shows the licensing issues involved.
Then other old games like Alundra vanishing & publishers vanishing too,more's the pity.
Then there’s the question if playing said classics is streaming only,it would potentially rule out a lot of territories that never saw PS Now.
And obviously pricing both for new & existing PS Plus users to upgrade if they chose & what happens to the basic level service etc.,are all things to wait & see.
There is no genuine gamepass competeter until ps5 Sony first party games hit it day 1...which Sony seem reluctant to do.
@yellowdog05 why the hell do you care? This is what I'll never understand ...you guys go on about the business model about gamepass making money...neglecting the value it offers gamers...which, as a gamer, the only thing you should care about. Gamepass offers gamers great value. Who cares if it's making Microsoft money???? That's Microsofts problem. Not ours. When it actually effects us is when we should care. Right now, it isn't. So stop caring what's making money and what isn't. Get a grip. These are the good times...and you guys deny yourself them by pretending you have stock on ms.
@Bleachedsmiles - Because that's an incredibly selfish view to take. As gamers, we don't exist in a vacuum, we form part of the videogame ecosystem; it's to all our benefit to care about the entire system, not just what we get out of it. And that goes for devs as well; everyone needs to care about the entire system, otherwise it becomes harder and harder to sustain, and then where will we be?
I think at the moment, there are too many potential obstacles to clear for me to be interested. Firstly, it would have to actually be made available in my region, unlike PS Now. Second, the pricing for the base rate of PS+, unlike Nintendo, is pretty high already (here the regular price for a yearly sub is $80); to throw in not one, but two extra pricing tiers on top of that? I'd probably end up having to pay something like $150 per year, and at that point it does kinda become a bit too much to regularly pay.
On top of that, how many of these old games would be both worth playing, and aren't already playable on a PS4/5? For example, take a look at how much of the PS1's library (Crash, Spyro, Final Fantasy, Resident Evil, Castlevania: SotN, even MediEvil) are available in some form on current systems. Not to mention a lot of these are available as remakes, meaning you'd be getting a technologically inferior copy to something that's not only already on the market, but fairly cheap as well.
To be fair, there's plenty of time for more information to be released, and the idea of adding an extra tier to PS+ to allow access to a large collection of old games isn't too bad, it just needs to clear up a few things before it sounds enticing enough, at least imo.
@TheCollector316
Will point out xbox gamepass is £7.99 a month while psnow is £8.99 a month.
Its gamepass ultimate which is £10.99 a month which includes xbox live gold, pc gamepass and xcloud streaming. and no one pays that they just convert gold to ultimate or get it free with reward points
I don't need something that's the equivalent of Game Pass but it would be really nice to have something comparable. I won't lie and say I haven't been tempted to make the leap & get a Series system just to give Game Pass a try. If Sony had something even comparable, it might stop that temptation from lingering in the back of my mind. Plus, I really wish I could use the X-Box style controller on my PS system, I love that design.
I'm surprised this wasn't ready for the PS5's launch.
I'm hoping the extra time it took was spent getting it up and running in every country that sells the PS5.
@trev666 yeh a lot of ppl are saying that gamepass ultimate is expensive blah blah ,if they really knew anything about game pass they'd know ppl do as you have said in your post ,a lot of ppl just do a few searches everyday to pay for gamepass
I think it's pretty clear they aren't planning to dump first party blockbusters on there, and if they aren't it's not really a game pass competitor. What it can hope to do is offer a different type of value by offering a much deeper catalog then game pass or for lower cost. But the whole hype of gp is for a flat fee you're there for every major launch. Fh5, Halo, starfield. If this won't do that for hfw, Ragnarok, gt7, it's not not a competing product unless it's competing by offering value in other ways.
There’s just not a chance that GamePass is profitable at current pricing. If Xbox has been a standalone company they wouldn’t have been able survive like this.
You have to remember that no publisher would add their games to GamePass if it didn’t promise more revenue than selling them the normal way.
But this all breaks badly with the promise of AAA 1st party games on day one. It’s been years in development and it’s supposed to earn the same by sharing a small piece of that $15 fee per month?
The goal today is all about getting sub numbers high enough and then start increasing prices over time, lex Netflix. I wouldn’t be surprised if it’ll cost twice what it costs today in a couple of years.
I really don't get why people make a big deal about this. I think game pass is crap.
What is the point of a huge library? You won't be able to have enough room for it on the HDD and you won't have enough time to play it all.
Selection is important because we are not eternal. At which point why pay for what you aren't gonna play?
@Nem I should have known better. I bought a Series X because I happened to find one in the wild in June. Couldn't believe my eyes and bought it out of an impulse. Long story short: It would surprise me if I spent more than 30 hours with it. Sure, not being a racing guy and not a fan of Halo is part of the reason. Luckily, I could sell it without any loss which I will probably do. I might rebuy it some years down the road when something comes along that truly interests me.
Fully aware Sony won't make 1st part games avaliable day one but feel like they should do discounted day one if your a tier 3 subscriber. Say £50 day one instead £70.
This makes more sense for Sony as they can still make a profit (all bit it a bit of a smaller one) and it also locks people into there ecosystem even more as people who buy there games disc (where Sony gets less money overall) will now by digital as there getting a £20 discounted and Sony will get the full £50 (minus VAT).
I've never been interested in PSNow but I use gamepass. My impression is that Sony don't really know how to celebrate their legacy.; They release d a half assed mini consoles & Jim Ryan has gone on record being dismissive of older titles.
If this is going to be a success then your going to need to see a decently large catalogue of PS1,2 & 3 titles ideally with something that makes the graphics more palatable. I still use my fat PS3 fairly regularly and some of those older titles games are awful on huge modern screens, even some of the early PS3 games look a bit fuzzy.
Microsoft has a increasing large catalogue of exclusives (if you include the Bethesda back Catalogue and the indie games they are locking into day one exclusives) no one is going to be that fussed if it's the same third party titles that are on gamepass and a slow rollout of roms.. look at Nintendo.
@oconnoclast agree with u there I get more enjoyment outta playing games now then waking up with a hangover plus what I would of spent way more on a night out then what I do with games so no brainer
@FullMetalWesker 'youre so selfish for enjoying gamepass right now, you should be wanting Sony to keep buying up all the timed exclusives....it's the only way gaming survives!'
Dude, take a step back. Gamepass is great value for gamers, and great for gamers. If it ends up 'not working' because it's not sustainable then the gaming industry doesn't die. What are you on? Gaming has survived far worse than gamepass. You all act like gamepass just came out this year and that it will destroy everything...and it's only ever on PlayStation boards where you hear so much 'concern' over gamepass being sustainable...funny that. Xbox gamers are simply enjoying. If it goes it goes...the point is they're not wasting years denying themselves the chance to try all the games that are on it...whilst you're asked to spend £70 a pop to see if you like them or not. Notice none of you ever bring up the price increase Sony adopted this gen as being bad for gaming...how many more would have tried Returnal had it been reasonably priced? I know I would've.
@poperamone get that mini console, it's awesome for emulation. Just get a usb stick off eBay for £10-15 and you'll get loads of great games playing on without having to have any knowledge of using emulators. It's a great little box.
If i’m honest they would get me with War of the Lions and Crisis Core with trophies (and maybe Dynasty Warriors 2 and 3). Otherwise not sure how interested I would be!
@Bleachedsmiles At some point I'm going to get a mister or retropie..
@trev666
PS Now is $60 a year and regular Game Pass is $120 a year. If you pay for PS Now (or PS+ for that matter) monthly, you are paying way more than that.
If they can guarantee PS1-PS3 and PSP backwards compatibility, I'm definitely all in.
We need to also have Vita games thrown in too though.
@Bleachedsmiles Yawn. Another GP drone.
I have a Series X with GP and PS5 with Plus. Got GP because of the loss leading £1 offer but very quickly realised most of it is a big ol' bucket of dross. Of course, there's gems on there, but it sure ain't the miracle lots proclaim it to be. Since I played the few decent games and first party stuff (of which I'd probably only have actually paid for Forza) I've hardly touched it compared to the PS4/5 games.
I get the whole fanboi thing for their own console, but as someone with both if I had to give one up then the PS5 would be the one staying. Wouldn't even have to think about it
@redcorpuscle oh no, it's one of those 'i got both consoles so I'm not a fanboy honest...I'm just going to tell you which one is better because you clearly asked'...
The quality of the games on gamepass is subjective. The value gamepass offers isn't.
@Bleachedsmiles Ha, I mentioned the value of gamepass. It can’t be argued, what I’m arguing is only Microsoft can pull this off. If you think wiping out Sony and Nintendo is great, that’s your silly opinion to keep.
@Bleachedsmiles - sigh That is pretty far from what I meant. To clarify, I wasn’t saying you were selfish for liking gamepass, I was saying you were selfish for not caring for the people who deliver you these services in the first place. In your post, you expressed dismay at people asking how Microsoft can afford GP longterm, asking why people care, before stating your belief that gamers should only care about what they get out of it. Only caring what you get out of a deal is incredibly selfish and a big middle finger at the people who work tirelessly to bring you these products and services. This is what my post was saying.
@yellowdog05 who mentioned wiping out Sony and Nintendo?
@FullMetalWesker ok...so tell me why you believe Devs/publishers are putting their games on gamepass for free. If they got nothing out of putting games on gamepass they wouldn't...unless you think they're all idiots? Either way, why should I be concerned, as a gamer, about their own choice to place themselves on gamepass if they're not concerned about making that choice?
Only caring about the deal is incredibly selfish??? Am I getting gamepass for free? Am I getting plus for free? Is psnow free? Do you deny yourself plus over concerns for the game Devs who place their games on it each month? Maybe you should start paying for gamepass and make sure it gets more money...you may sleep better.
Sony can't afford to bleed financially for the service like Microsoft do with Gamepass. As we see Gamepass is putting pressure on Sony. But at the same time to compete Sony need to go all out. Playstation still got the lead but Xbox is gaining momentum
I was looking at a video of someone going through Gamepass on their Xbox and it just looks like a cr*py Mobile phone App games store with 99% of rubbish games on it like those App stores have on it. I really can't understand all this fuss about Gamepass really.
@Carl-G because we all just play solitaire and snake on it. It's amazing.
Meanwhile...pretty much every week there's a news post in here about a game thats on gamepass finally hitting playstation. Or articles on 'sonys answer to gamepass', or posts saying they 'played this on gamepass'....all because it offers nothing more than mobile games. Crazy isn't it.
Be careful what you wish for. If you want Sony to make all their games live service and full of microtransactions then sure hope for a GP alternative. There's a reason why MS is fine giving away their $60 games for $15 a month when every series they have either has tons of DLC like Forza and Gears or are completely live service like Halo and Sea of Thieves. FH5 just came out and there's already almost $100 of DLC on Steam.
Why not just use Gamefly? It's a few bucks more a month than GP for ANY 2 games a month. Instead of all the crap indie titles that come to GP and waiting for the one decent AAA game you can get any AAA title basically the day it comes out. If I played on console and wanted to rent games then that would be the service that would most appeal to me.
@Bleachedsmiles What is this Value of game pass you talk about? I have looked at Xbox One and Xbox One X for value to see about buying one for game pass access. I have not seen value equal to or nothing to make me feel it was better than PlayStation! If I did I would also own both consoles. I don't say this with any biases towards Xbox gamers or conformation of my choice is "the best for everyone". What each individual enjoys most is what right for them!
I only sub to PS Plus and have from it's start. I subbed to PS now when it dropped to $59 for a year. I used it a grand total of 30 minuts to one hour the whole year I had it, I played Lemmings LOL. I buy a lot of games on Playstation New. My top focus in gaming is single player games! I don't play old or retro games I put a lot of time into them when they were new games. I know I missed Ori, Sunset Overdrive and Cuphead new, But that's not enough to justify a new $500 console and game pass.
I think one thing that has game pass succeed is the fact that every single game can be downloaded.
I have decent Internet but when I tried playstation now and played games like Arkham origins, There was such a lag and major frame rate issues.
I know on playstation now they have with modern games you can download them but give us the ability to download PS3 games and that will set it over the top and make me instantly subscribe.
Im already on ps now. 100s of ps4 titles to download is great.
People talk about gamepass 1st party titles, but ms has hardly had any at all, and many of the other 3rdparty titles are the same on both services. Im a gamepass ultimate subscriber, but i dont think think sony will need to give away the big guns to compete at all.... Get some ps5 titles on it, give a few big titles and it will be fine. Couldnt care less fir anything before last gen and never will until its proper retro xD
There is a bad thing about this new 3 tier subscription service. I did not see PS Now as a stand alone subscription! You can buy PS Plus or PS Plus AND PS Now.
It will only ever compete with GamePass if the exclusives all launch day one on the service, which will never happen.
@KippDynamite We’re talking about subscription services. Microsoft is way, way ahead in both subs and the service it offers. Don’t fanboy.
im wondering how this will effect me as a psnow user
@TheCollector316 if your paying $120 for a year of game pass your doing something wrong
@JohnKarnes What is the value of gamepass?...ok. Are we talking actual value of the service or personal value to yourself?if the latter then I can't answer that as anything I say you'll simply counter with it not being to your own interests...right?
So let's focus on the objective value gamepass offers...
Day 1 first party releases. Again, you may not care for halo, Forza, future Bethesda releases ect...but having access to all of them day one gives the service value...just as Sony's first party being on psnow day one would boost the value of that service. I'm sure you can understand that....especially when the alternative is playing these games for £60/70 a pop.
Day 1 3rd party releases. There's been several games that have hit gamepass day one from 3rd party also...The medium. The Ascent. Back for blood. MLB the show. Ect. Again, maybe not to your personal tastes but these are all games that come out the same time on PlayStation costing £50+
Recent releases coming to gamepass first...this month gamepass gets the latest Alien game for example.
A big library of Xbox games spanning all generations.
EA play is also part of gamepass...so get 10hours trial of the newest EA games. Aload of EA games. Again...this service is an additional charge on PlayStation.
Cloud gaming. Stream your games anywhere.
I won't mention online play as I think that should be free for all console gamers in a world of cross play.
Perks - exclusive sales on games. Usually monthly 3rd party perks like 3 months Spotify for a quid ect
There's probably something obvious I'm forgetting but I reckon that's plenty of value the service offers?
I have psnow and really enjoy it. I got a year for like $ 50 . Thanks under 5 dollars a month. I like to try games I would never buy . Last of us 2 was last month and mafia definite was this month. It’s hard to complain about that for $ 5. I just wish ps now and plus would stop giving the same games. A lot of duplicates. I should mention that I have good internet so streaming is no problem. Some people have had a lot of problems streaming but I have been lucky sofar
Sony is never going to give day1 games to psnow. To be honest I don’t know why Xbox does it. I would be super pissed if a spent 5 years making a aaa title only to have it given away for”free” without letting it run its corse for $$
@meistergeister
"No doubt this is a ‘boot to the throat’ move upon micro$oft (aka microshaft) no doubt!!!"
This is the funniest thing I've read in this thread so far....
This isn't going to be a GamePass killer, not even in your wildest dreams. It needs native backwards compatibility to even compete, not streaming, which it will be. Or have flagship titles day 1, which it won't either.
But I'm sure $ony know what they are doing right?
Not interested. I know very few people here voted for that last option but I think it’s because not that many gamers come to this site regularly all things considered and only gamers who follow gaming news regularly. I think a lot of people gaming on PlayStation, even maybe a majority, don’t care and only want PS+ as cheap as possible. (After all if your not interested you even can hardly be bothered clicking on this article and so don’t even vote. It took me some formidable boredom and will power to do so 😅)
The press and professionals have given this type of service much more publicity than it deserves for many reasons (first of which being something easy to talk about of course)
Edit
I’m not clear as usual but to expand I’d say a huge chunk of PSGamers are still using discs and the publishers don’t hold them by the b yet so to speak. In the great and wonderful future age of all digital then of course that type of service will become more predominant. 😅
I've been waiting for Sony to do something like this, if it happens then great but it needs to rival gamepass. If Ms can pull off day 1 releases then I expect Sony to be able to do the same and all within a decent price like gamepass. I just foresee this being underwhelming and I hope I'm wrong but I do want to see Ps5 games available straight away with a massive selection of ps4 games and obviously previous gens too. I just think if Sony is going to do this then they need to go all in and make it a service where people actually say "WOW" and throw thier money at it.
@UltimateOtaku91
Somehow I think Xbox gamers are not really interested in discs anymore because Xbox software has become completely dependent to all online digital at this point even to play discs by BC. Game pass rental and perma sub makes sense for the majority.
PlayStation still doesn’t need always online to work and retail discs are still strong (and cheaper than digital)
Anyone expecting Day 1 first party releases is likely setting themselves up for a fall. This will be a rebranded and expanded PS+ plus PS Now. Nothing wrong with that but it won't be a 1:1 Game Pass competitor.
If the games, price and cycling of content is good then this could still be good.
Three tiers is honestly too many and would confuse people even more. Two would be better, only Plus and Now. Nintendo has also shown how easily this can be blown: they overcharged and under-delivered, used crappy emulation, and now no one is signing up.
What alot of people want is actual BC, where you put in an old disc (PS1/PS2) and play the game in an emulator at 3X resolution.
Sony exclusives are totally worth their price. And after 1st year of sales there's always an opprtunity to grab it for 50% price.
To include exclusives in the subscription would be a desparate step in a dire situation, which is obviously not the case here.
@JJ2 It's crazy how often a new release can sell out of physical copies at release, game stores and (Especially) supermarkets greatly underestimating how popular the format still is. Even if digital and god forbid, streaming are the future then physical is certainly still a part of right now, something many people can't seem to believe.
@Balosi
I think COVID first year was a big blow to retail but it’s coming back strong.
Obviously cost is a factor and hopefully Sony learns from Nintendo on that, even though we are talking about much different offerings. And like many others have said it's about what games are included. A win would be some new AAA titles on day one as well as a back library of PS3, PS2 and PS1 games.
I would love to shelve my old consoles and play all or most of the titles I enjoy on my PS4 or a PS5 if I ever find one. And hopefully these games are a download but streaming them may be the only option. I have yet to try out PS Now so I have no idea how it performs, especially games that are streamed like on PS3.
@KippDynamite this is false. The xbox brand as a whole is profitable.
Show Comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...