If this report is accurate, then we’d strongly recommend Sony goes back to the drawing board – and fast. New details have emerged regarding PlayStation’s revamped PS Plus subscription service, which is “pretty close to actually launching”. The problem? It sounds like pretty poor value for money based on what’s being described so far.
News come by way of chatty Venturebeat journalist Jeff Grubb, who was speaking as part of his Giant Bomb show, as reported and transcribed by VGC. According to the scribe, he’s obtained new information which tallies with a report first shared by Bloomberg’s Jason Schreier, although the specific details are still a little vague.
So, there will allegedly be three tiers: Essential ($10 per month), Extra ($13 per month), and Premium ($16 per month). In the case of Premium, that’s actually more expensive than Xbox Game Pass Ultimate, which is worth keeping in mind as we run through the specifics of what you actually get. Spoilers: it’s nowhere near as good as Microsoft’s service.
Grubb suggests Premium sounds a lot like EA Play, with trials, “classic games”, and streaming functionality. It’s unclear how many trials you’ll get – presumably it’ll be a curated selection rather than the entirety of the PS Store’s library – and what those classic games will be. It’s been mooted before that Sony may bundle in retro games, similar to Nintendo Switch Online.
You’ll also get a catalogue of downloadable titles, which will be included with the Extra option. This, it’s assumed, will extend to anything currently downloadable on PS Now, so “over 250, 300 games, something like that”. A significantly larger PS Plus Collection, then. It’s worth noting that there’ll be no streaming functionality in Extra – that’s reserved for the Premium tier.
And then there’s the Essential plan, which Grubb claims is PS Plus “just like you know it today”, with monthly games and discounts. There’s no word of whether there’ll be an annual subscription option for any of these tiers – we assume there will be – and there’s no mention of the availability of first-party games at launch. Sony has already said that it doesn’t see this as sustainable.
It’s obviously difficult to draw too many conclusions from what is, admittedly, an ambiguous report. However, our first impression is that this doesn’t sound like good value for money in the slightest, and potentially a mistake. Obviously, it’ll be down to Sony to clarify the details and make its case, but we can’t see many paying $16 month for an extended PS Plus Collection, demos, and “classic games”.
[source giantbomb.com, via videogameschronicle.com]
Comments 98
Well, that’s….something…
I hope "streaming functionality" doesn't mean they'll be locking a feature like Remote Play behind a pay wall.
I don't need retro games. And I prefer downloading games I play. So for me, it's really a matter of how much more, annually, does Extra become? I'd pay for an expanded PS+ Collection.
@MFTWrecks It would be more like PS Now, where you can stream games on your PC, etc.
Sony shouldn't make any changes to their services. Anything they do that doesn't match Game Pass will be treated as a failure by everyone.
Meh, coming from Grubb I don't believe anything until I see it happen. That man just spits out nonsense constantly tbh
But anyway, this doesn't show us much so far. The retro games sure would be cool...alongside PSNOW and if they start having more day 1 releases, it will be good
May be the nudge I need to stop renewing ps+ for good.
$10/mo is essentially doubling the price of PS Plus' annual sub. Ridiculous considering gaming has only become worse over the last 3 years.
At those rates... there's essentially no reason for me to continue being online on my Playstation.
So right now you have guesses.
Well wouldnt be new Push square if we didnt have our daily bash on Sony.
@Neverwild It's not bashing on Sony, it's just what's being reported. I don't think it sounds great based on what's said here, but I'll wait for official word before coming to any conclusions.
@WizzNL I checked this. Actually a single month of PS Plus (if bought individually) costs $9.99 right now, so it's no change.
It would be an increase, however, if they got rid of the more cost-effective annual tier that's currently available.
If the streaming bit in Premium means you can stream any PS3/4/5 game that you own, it could be quite an interesting offer. Sort of a cloud PS5 compared to just select titles as it is today.
And it needs to be on mobile.
Sounds like $90 a year which wouldn't be so bad
Yeah im not putting any stake in this. We always treat leakers like the heralds if things to come but not a single one managed to see the Bungie acquisition coming. I'll wait til we get actual confirmation before passing judgment.
Always depends on if there's an annual sub discount. I always claim that gamepass ultimate is 3x the price of ps plus because most people sub for a month at $60 (and usually cheaper when you can catch a sale to stock up) while it's $180 a year for ultimate. But even then Sony needs to be careful how to market this. No way can they compete as a gamepass alternative. Lean into back compat as the messaging (if that's even on the table)
What about countries where PS Now is not available yet?
Sounds good to me. $30 a month for PS premium + GPU and an exclusive here and there seems great and plenty to play. Hopefully this is accurate!
I'd be ok with the premium option if the classic games were worth it. Streaming I have no issue with. Colour me interested. Especially as my Game Pass Ultimate sub expires in May and I'm not renewing it.
All I really care about is the online play (for Souls/FromSoftware games — I'm not a big online gamer). I don't really ever look forward to the free games that come with plus because I know once my sub lapses, the games are gone. And I'm not one to horde games just for the sake of them being free. I'd much rather wait for any game I want to go on sale and pay for it to play whenever I want, regardless of some subscription. And if the game is that good, I'll just pay for it full price.
If the basic tier just allows for basic online play, I'll be happy as long as it's cheaper than what I'm paying now for Plus.
If I have to pay the same price for the same online play but they take away the free games... well... that's going to suck. (More money less value)
@Uncharted2007 PS+ is currently priced at $10/month. It's just that there are multi-month options.
It's unknown (but likely) that those options will continue. They'd get roasted for doubling the price of PS+.
Even if true It's worth baring in mind that up until now Sony have always charged a premium for a monthly subscription compared to annual. While I'm not a fan of that it may be significantly cheaper per month if you go annual.
I dont subscribe now, i wont subscribe then.
Sony's annual prices are half the cost of paying per month. That means that the highest tier would be the equivalent of $8 per month. That sounds pretty fair, but you can either look at it as being a good price per year, or a bad price per month.
@Olmaz There's no mention of that but safe to assume this will be more widely available.
Probably, $60, $80, $100 annually which isn't bad. As far as the services themselves, it seems just like Jason originally reported. Seems okay to me. Subscribing to Premium is entirely based on the library of classic games and if they are streaming only. If not, then its same old PS Plus or "Essential" for me.
😒…🗑…and I don't have more to say!
A little disappointed, if this is true. Might just stay with the base plan then. Perhaps the “Extra” if the 12 month pricing isn’t too bad.
I'm just here to say that Jeff Grubb blocked me on Twitter for saying "Go get 'em, tiger" to him while he was having a mad one 😂
What I want is pretty simple, bundle existing psNow and PsPlus into psPremium and give us an acceptable discount for buying both.
I’m not paying more for limited trials, classics & leftover scraps. Offer up a good catalogue of PS5 games & some bigger releases Day 1 like Gamepass or piss off
I mean, if the selection is good? I'm in Brazil, we don't even have PS Now here. So tbh if this service even launches here, it's better than NOTHING lol
So if I want to continue accessing the ps3 games I do currently then I have to pay more? I said before this is nothing more than charging extra for what we get now but it will prob have a big marketing budget to ridicule people who question it.
@ED_209 He's right
By the way, what people really expected from this since Sony already stated that Day 1 First pARTY releases on a service isn't a thing to them.
I would be happy with just the option to buy ps1, ps2 and ps3 games to be honest
@WizzNL they are upping the sub again? Isn't £50 a year enough? And the monthly free games are no good anyways so we will be paying even more for crappy service, great 😤😤
Firstly, nobody pays monthly, surely(?), so these prices are irrelevant. Beyond that there are simply no details to judge. I mean, how many games are added per month? Does streamline extend to phones now? Are there retro games being added?
If I’m given at least 6 games a month to download, including PS5 games, and these games are of a good standard, then I’ll pay around £75 a year (just over double what plus is on sale at frequently), especially if I can stream games to my phone and there are a good number of turn based and narrative games for that purpose; if we get old ps1, ps2 games, with trophies, en mass via emulation, I’d pay more…
Don’t care about games day one. In fact, I’d rarely play a game day 1. Rather wait until it’s actually finished.
I've gotten a ridiculous amount of playtime and value from Game Pass since I picked up a Series X a couple of months ago. The Xbox was originally intended to be an exclusives-only backup system with the PS5 being primary. They have since switched places. I was really hoping Sony would actually bring some competition to the table.
So does anyone know or think that there will be a subscription service where you will be able to play games without the need for a PlayStation console?
@Deadhunter
The first year or so is always good while you eat through the games that appeal. It was the same when I had PS Now for a year. Beyond that you might get one game you really want to play to completion every few months if you’re lucky. At that point it starts being cheaper to just buy those games on sale and have them forever (discounting any workarounds for cheap Gamepass of course).
Spoiler Alert: It will never be as good as Gamepass unless you want smaller scale games like Miles, Ikishima and Uncharted Lost legacy instead of Spider-Man 2, Uncharted 5 and Ghost 2. Shawn and Jim Ryan did point out it was not sustainable.
I'm expecting this from what I read:
Tier 1: Ps Plus as we know it.
Tier 2: Bigger PS Plus collection and ps1-3 BC.
Tier 3: Trials and PS Now Full catalogue.
Why is everyone so upset? This is the exact same as what was leaked previously for Spartacus that you all couldn't get enough of.
If the naming system is:
PS+ Essential
PS+ Extra
PS+ Premium
Well it's better than:
Nintendo Switch Online
Nintendo Switch Online+ Expansion Pass
but that's a very low bar to clear.
PS+
PS+ P(remium)
There's no need for 3 tiers, people either pay the least they can for online or the most they can for games, 3 tiers just muddies the waters and leads to stupid names.
Prices will sort themselves out once the annual prices are announced. Still think 3 is one too many though.
Nothing new then apart from a pricing structure. This has all been reported before, just worded differently. The middle package is the PS4 games plus PS5 (eventually) tier, and the most expensive tier is ability to play PS1/2/3 games via streaming and cloud gaming on PC and hopefully phones. Grubb just regurgitating what we already know.
Even if it turns out to be a good deal 'The Internet' will moan about it anyway I can't be arsed with all this(I am moaning already) stuff really. I just want normal AAA games like always that I buy and enjoy them and that is it. Oh and let me back-up my PS5 game saves to USB to ASAP so I don't have to subscribe to all this stupid stuff monthly/yearly :-/
Once again, too much speculation and very little fact, so I'll reserve judgment. I'm not that unhappy with PS Plus to be honest. I do think they should have a free tier, though, for just online access.
They also need to stop drip feeding information and make some concrete announcements about what they are doing, when we're going to see it and how much it'll cost. I'm fed up with it.
@rjejr I think 3 tiers would be fine if Tier 1 was free, online access and maybe demos.
See what happens. If PS+ goes up and I have a feeling it will, I may not renew. I hardly play online and only download the odd game, could probably do without it.
I'd prefer to keep PSNOW as it is today. For 60$ a year I have over 800 streaming and downloadable games. That's all I want. Ps plus games are crap anyway. Don't change anything, do better marketing
Jeff Grubb....c'mon we all know this guy is full of it.
I'll wait and see what the real reveal says and then moan, rather then take this guy's word.
Sounds like they're basically doing what people wanted and combining Plus and Now, but also adding a BC tier for those that want BC and no PS Now. $16 a month is $4 cheaper than if you bought Now and Plus separately. It's obviously still not fully comparable to Gamepass, but its not meant to be and still a good deal.
@rjejr They should call it.
PS Plus Extra Essential Premium Sauce.
@huyi you can always find good deals for a yearly sub online..i dont think i've ever paid full price for a sub..
I think the only way this will be seen as good value is if they add pretty much all the main PS4 exclusives & a healthy selection of now year old PS5 titles.
I don't really see the need for there to be such a radical change anyway tbh. All I think they need to do is improve the PS Now lineup and bundle it together as an option with PS+.
@SJBUK I don't like naming free tiers. If it's free then everyone has it and it isn't free so much as it just is. Nobody says "I have free tier internet service on my PC". If Sony wanted to make online free like back on PS3, which they don't and their shareholders would never let them even if they did, then it wouldn't need a named tier, it would just be free online.
Xbox had a free "silver" tier which they were finally smart enough to get rid of.
@RevGaming "PS Plus Extra Essential Premium"
Now let's not go giving them any stupid ideas. 😉
Not surprised, they should have done nothing and just added some classics to the PS+ offerings. They're never changing the full price big budget AAA system seller single player game strategy until it fails, and it ain't failing anytime soon, this will just get them some bad PR.
@roe Doubt Ghost and TLoU2 probably will be there until they reach 15-20m sold. I can see the others. Spider-Man should be releasing on PC pretty soon.
@rjejr I'm full of those hehe
On the one hand, the services really do need a refresh, regardless of the competition. On the other hand, whatever they do is going to look a bit inferior to what MS offer.
I say they just go for it with confidence, it needs to be done and they should be doing their own thing.
@godofwarj5
PS Now needs improvement, but bundling the two into one premium service is what I want as well. The biggest thing PS Now should improve is putting PS5 games on the service and that includes allowing users to play the PS5 version of PS4 games that have upgrades. That one change would vastly improve the service. They don't need to do day one releases.
When was the consensus anymore than what Grubb has said.
I hate Grubb as much as the next guy, but if you honestly thought Spartacus was going to be anymore than this, you’re a fool.
And this article reads like you don’t really know PlayStation at all.
Bottom tier - as is currently
Upgrade tier - old games
They was never going to do day 1 cause its not profitable. “Sustainable” as Uncle Phil loves to insist, is not the same as profit.
Do some research.
I've no interest in streaming games. The technology simply isn't good enough for my tastes.
Not only that, but I don't like these GamePass and EA Play subscriptions. At all.
I don't want to pull a "slippery slope" but I'm going to have to. It's a slippery slope. The more people who sign up to these services, the more tempted the industry is to start pulling the rug and making certain games subscription pass/thing only.
The industry has shown time over that given an inch it will take a mile. Microtransactions, NFTs, Online passes (trying to kill pre-owned sales), etc.
So I'm cautious
I have no problem with the tiers themselves. The only issue is Sony would need to steer away from anything that could compare them directly to Game Pass.
Those prices at first glance are a bit of an eyebrow raiser. As they currently are people will inevitably ask why they should be paying more than Game Pass, no matter what is offered.
If they threw Crunchyroll in on top of that Premium tier I'd be chuffed though.
I will say the "classic games" including trophies or not would be a deal breaker for me on the top tier.
Also still no confirmation on whether they’d start adding PS5 games to it. I would hope so but this is Sony…
@rjejr I take your point but as it's something you have to sign-up for it's got to be called something, might as well have all services under the same umbrella.
@rjejr You forgot the sauce.
People need to accept that day one AAA won't happen, Sony can't take the loss on sales. Their live service games might cos it's more about getting as many players as possible. Sony can also supplement the service by adding Crunchyroll, some will scoff at that but the gaming and anime markets aren't that far apart.
I think some people maybe confused on downloadable vs streaming. These are essentially the same. The only reason the streaming option exists is due to whatever game being "stream" is being emulated. Meaning it can not run locally on your current console. For example, a PS3 game can not run on a PS4/PS5, due to how PS3 games were made.
I pay £3.40 a month for GPU including all exclusives day one.
$16 a month without exclusives isn’t comparable at all. The library of classic games would need to be pretty much every game on all three gens for me even to have a look and TBH I own at least 1000 games on ps123 I have far more interest in being able to play them rather than a tiny selection for this sort of money. This just isn’t a good idea at all.
This sucks if true, I was genuinely looking forward to a Game Pass-like service from Sony. But $16/month with no day one first-party titles? Count me out.
Better off doing nothing at all. It needed to be big, this is nothing but peanuts. Something to make a PR stink about with no actual substance. “Look, we listened! Now pay up, chumps.”
That sounds remarkably.....lame? Wow....hopefully it's not this. I had much higher hopes.
I have a bad feeling they’re going to fluff this service reboot. Like they feel they have to do something to respond to MS but can’t afford to give too much away without ruining their business model.
Hope I’m wrong!
This sounds pretty close to what I expected. As long as I can buy a year of plus for around $50-70 I'll be fine. If I need to go monthly to the point it's double that a year I will definitely be canceling my subscription. It's important to remember though none of this is confirmed so let's chill and wait for official confirmation before we get the pitchforks out.
I pay $40-$45 a year for Plus and don’t expect that to change.
@Tulio517 Is it though? We have PS Now, I had it for a year but saw no reason to renew. Sometimes nothing is better than spending your money on a bad something.
Paying extra for demos? Behave. I'll reserve judgement until its announced but Jimmy Ryan does love to disappoint
@Stocksy How do you get it that cheap?
@guntam Speak for yourself, mate. There's no PS Now in Brazil. I don't even have an opinion on the service because it's just not available in my country
Sounds like I'll be an Extra boy, not a bad deal especially considering how deeply discounted the annuals usually are. Hopefully they'll have a cheap upgrade option for people like me who have their next couple years paid up.
Idk why everyone is assuming the "streaming" bit is referring to games.
I say this because iirc, Sony said they bought Crunchyroll from AT&T, and Funimation with the goal of "broadening distribution" via the PlayStation ecosystem.
I can see the "Extra" tier and it's "streaming" being access to Crunchyroll/Funimation.
I highly suspect that "premium" will only be available in selected territories, like PS Now
If this turns out to be the way the new service will run, count me out! I'll stick to Classic as long as my subscription is current
10 dollars a month for ps plus ????
First party game trials is a kick in the nuts,
Like what we have pay another £70 for each u like while GP users get full day one games
@Snake_V5 if you have no GP ultimate , buy 12 months turkey gold (max of 36 months ) from cdkeys.com ,apply via VPN to your account them pay the £1 ( if not had before )to upgrade your gold to ultimate or one month at 10.99 if you have already had the £1 offer , you can get 3 years of ultimate for approx £65 to £75 depending on price of 12 months turkey gold at time of purchase
@PS5in2020 I've been hoping for exactly this for a long time. If the top tier came with anime streaming or something like that I'd be delighted with it.
Ryan said over a year ago that this would be a unique service. Adding anime to it would definitely be unique.
They just need to get the pricing right so people are not comparing it to game pass.
@BartoxTharglod
Yeah. Game Pass subscribers just got Psychonauts 2, Forza Horizon 5, Back 4 Blood, Age of Empires IV, Halo Infinite, Rainbow Six Extraction and now will be getting MLB The Show day one.
That's literally nothing
I’d say if this was the plan , save the money and don’t bother - it will be an absolute feast for a sony kicking vs ms on social media not a great place to re highlight the value proposition . This is a fight they should not have even got involved in
Also why do we not get crunchy roll it’s Sony owned but it’s a gamespass perk - I for one am feeling sore that I can’t watch the shenmue anime where Xbox owners can ? Same applies to the still on games pass mlb the show
@TheCollector316 I have both now and plus and honestly, I like now better if it weren’t for the psPlus library on the ps5. Still bundling the two and carrying the most up to date versions of games would be a huge win just as long as I don’t have to pay more than the two existing services cost currently
@PS5in2020 streaming and PlayStation typically refers to ps3 games b/c the ps3 is soooo difficult for Sony to figure out how to play natively on Sony’s own hardware…. In 2022, they still are struggling with it.
But to be fair, Nintendo is still struggling with how to play n64 games on newer consoles.
@ED_209 PS Plus in the current form is a success, judging by the number of the subscribers. So the real question is how many current PS plus subscribers will upgrade their plan to pay more.
Me and many others won't be comparing that PS++ to some GamePass. We will be comparing it to the current subscription.
I think the only thing that really matters - and what we don't know - is what the games are. If this thing comes with loads of old games with trophy support etc. then I'll be all over it. If it's a load of rubbish then I won't be.
No way they should be doing first party day and date though. It'd be insanity.
I wouldn't doubt this really is the plan. Look at Nintendo. Yeah, it's a lot less money, but they're selling 30-40 year old games and a few DLCs to games you may or may not own the game to use it with on a monthly fee. Never underestimate how much the mass market will lap up literally paying for nothing if it's monthly.
I could totally see Sony selling access to demos for the same price as GP and the mass market making it a huge success.
I hoped PS would find a way to be more competitive with MS, I was being optimistic, a rare feat for me, but if this really is their direction I think it distances PS and MS even further than is current in terms of value. But that only applies to the enthusiasts and games-savvy group that knows the difference. The masses will see the PS logo, know their friends play on it, and know they have a subscription automatically must be awesome because everyone wants the membership icon too look "in."
I will wait to see the actual rollout before I pass judgment. However, if this is close to what the final product is, this is a huge opportunity being squandered by Sony.
@SJBUK I suppose if you have to sign up for it then it needs a name, but I think if we're talking simply free internet and demos they would just call it you're PSN account like everybody has now to play on PS3, PS4 and PS5. "PS+" or "PS+ Free" doesn't really work for me, sorry.
On the bright side we never have to worry about it b/c online will never be free again, not with 56 million people paying for it. Though Fornite is free, and I'd guess a couple of others, so there is free online, and we don't need a PS+ account for it, so therefore we don't to need a PS+ name for it, just expand whatever it is Fortnite is doing now to every other game online.
@Deathnote93
Can't use "Sauce" because "Extra Essential Premium Sauce" was the name of Louis CK's canceled show in Kyiv tonight. 😉
PS now isn’t available in many parts of Europe and rest of the world, why pay more than game pass for less? I would pay to have all first part games in subscription after few months though,
@JSnow2
Have you seen it in real life then? Clever if it hasn't even been officially announced yet. Or do you go like everyone else on the internet blind to the words of Mr. Grubb? First wait and see what comes next and only then judge. But that's hard in this day and age.
@ED_209 Honestly if I can play more older games I'd be happy. PS Now isn't convenient at all, doesn't have much, and I hate having to switch accounts just to use it.
Show Comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...