-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Report: Sony overhauling PlayStation Plus with new tiers and streaming
Dolomite
Member
Lmfao who have you been talking to.
I know more folks with Gamepass from work/ school than own a PS5 at this point
sircaw
Banned
yep, you tell those dirty fanboys
RyanEvans21
Member
Yeah! because its easy to find PS5 right now! if not for wario64 tweets im still playing on my PS4.
Hawking Radiation
Member
Yeah PS users are happy because the PS Now and PS Plus services looks like they're going to be combined into one service.
This is nothing like GamePass.
No longer do you have to subscribe to two services which made no sense and its something PS fans have been asking for a long time now.
RyanEvans21
Member
if they combine it make sure they dont raise the price or we have the option to decline ps now.
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
Totally.
As long as Sony doesnt mess with the package, a combo package of PS+ and PS Now at a discount bundle option is good news for subbers. Gamers who dont sub wont care, but for anyone who already does PS+ and PS Now, or wants to edge up and do both at a bundle price, it's a good option. Who doesnt want to save some cash?
Or are gamers going to be counter-intuitive and be armchair accountants and say this is bad for Sony because offering a bundle price is losing money as some people are buying both now separately for full price?
Where's the armchair anaylsts?
Last edited:
yurinka
Member
Again, you're wrong. PSN and PS Now don't run in any network, they are networks themselves. Sony has their own infrastructure and many related patents.
Sony owns their own servers and have their own datacenters, but obviously like most similar companies in the world -being Microsoft one of them-, have many of their servers in 3rd party datacenters (obviously operated by Sony remotely). Datacenters are only buildings with a lot of refrigeration full of servers with staff taking care of them 24/7. These servers can be owned by the datacenter company or by their customer (in this case MS or Sony) hiring space for their servers there. This customer can hire virtual or physical servers, or to bring their own physical servers (as it happens with PS Now or XCloud).
Many apps, websites or services run on traditional servers, which have PC hardware and can share their resources between different services and apps from different customers who rent space there. A single of these computers may be hosting at the same time stuff from Youtube, Netflix, Azure, AWS, Facebook, Uber, internal corporate stuff, Spotify, a random website or a console game's multiplayer dedicated server and many other things, each one on its own virtual server. A physical server rack can host multiple virtual servers or a single virtual server can use multiple physical servers at the same time.
But this 3rd party datacenter company -same goes for Azure servers and datacenters- can't run in their own servers PS Now, because PS Now doesn't run on the traditional PC based hardware servers they use: PS Now server racks use a special hardware that are PS3 and PS4 hardware modified to run for streaming. Sony puts in this datacenter their own PS Now physical server racks. Xbox copied this strategy when they copied PS Now to make XCloud: XCloud server racks use Xbox hardware modified to run for streaming.
Regarding Azure having datacenters yes, they have datacenters. And Sony too (but way less because Sony only hosts there their own internal corporate stuff and services). And like Sony, MS also hires many 3rd party datacenter companies and operate their servers remotely.
Yes, when you get Azure they can give you server space for your website/app/service. In the same way some ISPs can, or some related companies like GoDaddy, Wordpress and so on. All these companies operate servers in many datacenters, some owned by them and som owned by 3rd party datacenter companies. MS (same goes with the 3rd party datacenter companies) can't offer Azure's servers to host PS Now there because only Sony makes and owns the PS3 and PS4 physical servers that PS Now uses. So either if located in datacenters owned by Sony, MS or 3rd party datacenter companies, PS Now always will use Sony's PS Now server racks because they are the only way to run PS Now.
It isn't mandatory to use MS servers or MS datacenters when using Azure, AWS or similar. In the same way it isn't mandatory to use Godaddy or wordpress servers or datacenters for your personal website. Because many customers -like in this case Sony- have their own physical servers, have their own datacenters or hire 3rd party datacenters or server space elsewhere.
TLDR: Sony and any other companies -like MS- host many of their servers in outsourced 3rd party datacenters because it's the cheapest option and more expensive ones don't offer anything special that justify it, so it's better to cut middleman costs. Same goes with Azure as software to remotely manage servers. It doesn't offer anything special, probably Sony switched from the market leader Amazon AWS to Azure because as part of the deal between Sony and MS to share game streaming R&D they offered a cheaper deal than the one Amazon was offering Sony, or Sony was interested in some patent MS may have.
Last edited:
Banjo64
cumsessed
Sad to see you permed.
There’s far worse insults and terminology thrown around on here.
lingpanda
Member
This was in the works back in 2019. I'm sure the pandemic stalled their plan. From the article they mention Sony using Microsoft Azure for game and entertainment streaming. https://news.microsoft.com/2019/05/16/sony-and-microsoft-to-explore-strategic-partnership/
Wizz-Art
Member
No they don't, if they had their own infrastructure in place they wouldn't rent it from AWS and Azure because they would have absolutely no need to do that at all. You don't see XBL renting from others to have their network up and running. Fact is there are a couple of big companies that own their own infrastructure and Sony is 100% not one of them. I'm sorry if it pains you.
Leyasu
Banned
Nearly every dev has worked with every platform holder. So using that logic, any acquisition should be considered organic growth.
Things change, and when Sony are the position to, I think that they will go day one with their games on their service. We will see what they do in the next few years
yurinka
Member
When 'I said studios who previously did work for them during a lot of time in many games' I obviously meant people who made many exclusive games, mr. Putin.
They made $25B in revenue and growing year after year. They make most of this money from games sold. PS4 is the game that sold more games in gaming history and seems PS5 has a bigger engagement per user. While a tiny part of their revenue comes from game subscriptions even if they have had way more subscribers than any other console game subscription and less $1 or similar deals. If they achieve their FY goal PS5 will be back to be the best selling console ever outselling the current record holder -their previous console, PS4- launch aligned. Their 1st party blockbuster games are selling more than ever, hitting over 10 and in a some case even 20 million copies.
They are breaking gaming history records and growing many records with their current strategy. To put their games day one on a subscription service would destroy it, it's a suicide idea that doesn't make any sense from a business side, specially considering game budgets increase every generation and already are too high and too risky. So they will continue sticking to their current strategy with only minor tweaks from time to time.
Leyasu
Banned
This reads like a pr piece lol joke. It is undeniable that they are doing really well.
But you just explained why they will do it in the future (the bit in bold) and why they will go day one pc at the same time. The cost of making games is not getting any cheaper, a subscription model takes away a lot of the risk as the subscribers are heavily subsidising dev costs. Maybe even fully paying once you have enough subscribers. Plus all those pc sales will help too. Those that don't subscribe still buy games. It won't have the apocalyptic effect that you are imagining.
As this is a few years away, we can agree to disagree, and revisit this in the future. Bookmark this post though
Last edited:
Gameplaylover
Member
You'll be missed.
Ozrimandias
Member
I'd go for Tier 3 if that tier brings ps1 ps2 and ps3 games, no doubt. My concern is, as always, availability. If it does not have availability for Latin America, or a greater availability than PS Now currently has, I think it will continue to fail.
ElCasual
Member
Have a question.
This will not made oficial in the next the game awards, this deserve a proper Spotlight. When PS made this oficial will be in proper and great sshowcase, so in that showcase will be a big game announcements. My question is will be a great game announcements in the game awards?
This will not made oficial in the next the game awards, this deserve a proper Spotlight. When PS made this oficial will be in proper and great sshowcase, so in that showcase will be a big game announcements. My question is will be a great game announcements in the game awards?
yurinka
Member
Game subscriptions (specially with streaming) aren't more profitable than to sell games. They will continue focusing on selling games because it generates more revenue and profit for them. If something they may put there day one only a few of their games, small ones or focused in MP GaaS.
And they make most of their money selling games for their console, and they need to have (at least timed) exclusives as selling point to sell consoles so forget day one PC ports (outside a few potential F2P/MP GaaS exceptions).
There are many things that should happen -at least many of them- to see them putting their games day one on a subscription:
-Their first tests with GaaS/F2P games are successful and decide to slowly migrate to a GaaS/F2P focus for most of their games. If it happens, this transition wouldn't be complete until at least PS7 launch (I think won't happen, I think they will have some traditional games and some GaaS games)
-The add-ons (DLC/IAP/season passes...) part of their revenue keep growing and game sales end representing a very small part of their revenue (this may happen but the size wouldn't be enough until PS6 or so
-Sony's subscription skyrockets and its revenue -including related DLC- becomes a bigger part than games sold -from sales+DLC-(I think they'll continue growing but will continue representing a small % of their revenue, so they won't focus too much on it)
-Game Pass outselling Sony's game subscriptions (won't happen, Sony is too ahead and I think Spartacus will increase the distance)
-3rd party PS game sales go down a lot (won't happen, keeps growing year after year)
-PS5 tanks in hardware sales (won't happen, it's breaking records and if were able to build more would destroy them)
Pretty much the same for almost the same reasons with having their games on PC day one, they may end being released quicker than over 2 years after release in PS but that's all.
NeonGhost
uses 'M$' - What year is it? Not 2002.
I still don’t get what that means can someone explain?Enough with all the fucking green rats the mods need to act
To me backwards compatability and downloading of games natively is key to a GP competitor. PSNow already has loads more games on the service, and its cheaper. It doesn't need to do day 1 first party releases.
I only care about "streaming" in gamimg as far as whatever extent it is involved in making Remote Play & SharePlay features work.
I only care about "streaming" in gamimg as far as whatever extent it is involved in making Remote Play & SharePlay features work.
Gameplaylover
Member
A hardcore Sony fanboy had a meltdown and called Xbox fans green rats in his last Post.
yurinka
Member
If it will be released in Spring, I expect it to be announced maybe a few weeks before in a random State of Play. Who knows, maybe they mix it with the PSVR2 full reveal and choose 'the future of PlayStation' or something like that as the theme of the stream.
Considering the big amount of big games delayed from 2021 to 2022 mixed with the 2022 ones not delayed to 2023 the year is going to be really packed regaring great games, so maybe they may show some game in this supposed event.
Or well they can just announce it on the PS Blog any random day.
Last edited:
Brofist
Member
Companies especially public ones are run on growth and future potential. Companies aren't run the way fans think they should be run, sitting and resting cause they're "number 1" and reacting after something negative happens.
By the time those things in your post would happen they'd be fucked, they'll get these services out and try to stay ahead of the curve.
Last edited:
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
Drama - Cringe - It's funny when people are getting banned for console warring while some of the mods are console warriors
First of all to any mod reading this, if your mom was fucked by one man only don't delete this thread, even at era they don't delete anything unlike the green trash you have here that delete a lot of posts and threads, covering their tracks or what do you have to hide? Now to the malignant cunt...
One of the biggest fanboys got so amped up and hyper, he did an account suicide thread to go down in flames. Good read. One of the funniest ever. Not evry day day you get account suicide threads, but when they happen it's hilarious. This one was top notch.
yurinka
Member
What companies want is to generate as much revenue, profit and growth as possible, and to get as much market share as possible.
With their current strategy they are excelling in all these areas and keep improving. Regarding to invest in future potential markets, out of the console makers Sony have been the first to seriously invest in modern VR or game streaming markets. Their current strategy also considers entering mobile and PC and also to keep iterating it with some next gen tweaks every generation. They have the market numbers and looking at their super successful results in the recent years seems proved they aren't dumb and know how to analyze the market.
As long as this strategy continues dominating in many areas they will continue with it. They won't destroy their main revenue sources and switch to a suicide business model just because a few forum users ask them to do so.
kingfey
Banned
This stems for gamepass, which is Xbox fans treasure (green rats). The idea of sony doing this service, is similar to gamepass, which most people where melting down, from the thoughts of this service. And since Sony is now thinking of doing a similar service, they are becoming part of the green rats. Spartacus is gamepass like service. And people who hated gamepass, will now have to embrace this service.
Brofist
Member
Doesn't matter who is first, the implementation matters most. They don't need to destroy anything to expand their services offering, which let's be honest aren't the best atm.
A company can be "first" and still have room for improvement. Popping out a God of War caliber game once or twice a year ain't gonna cut it in the long run.
Also what's this suicide business model you speak of?
Last edited:
kingfey
Banned
Companies dont have a say in that. If you want your company to last long, you need to adopt to the market. That is what gives you growth, in which in return gives you profit.
MS making gamepass, to have incentive to their console, Sony ditching console exclusive, and start porting to pc, EA getting in to steam. These are desperate movements, and signal to market change. The old method is unreliable, and without doing these risky business, you will be out of the game like konami, Sega from console space, and Atari.
Mobile is bringing huge change to gaming landslide. We are seeing more f2p games with mtx. This wasnt a thing in the past. And the amount of money mobile makes is much bigger than what AAA games make. Current industry cant combat to cash cow industry like that.
"TiMi Studios, the Tencent-owned developer of huge mobile hits Call of Duty: Mobile and the MOBA Honor of Kings, earned a staggering $10 billion in revenue in 2020, according to an April 1st Reuters report. Reuters' article says those earnings make TiMi the “world's largest developer,” according to its sources.Apr 4, 2021"
How the hell do you deal a market like that, if you use the normal profit system?
Leyasu
Banned
For all your walls of text(putting in some serious work in this thread. You doing this for free?), one little point you overlook that brings it all crashing down in flames.
Not every ps owner buys each and every exclusive.But not only that, this “record breaking revenue”doesn’t come from first party games alone does it.
Why you talking about gaas? Sony doesn’t need every game to be on. It is not the type of game that counts, it is the amount of content that does
Last edited:
yurinka
Member
Please, don't cry.
PS owners bought over 1700 million PS4 games, and a shit ton of DLC for them. Exclusives aren't the only games that make money for them, but they are main (not the only one) or one of the main selling point to buy the console where later users buy the other games. These first party games also generated billions of revenue and nice profits this generation.
Sony doesn't need to make all their games GaaS, and they won't make all their games GaaS because with their current strategy, KPI and growth they will generating more and more revenue and profit in the following years. But the % of their game division's revenue that comes from DLC/IAP/Season Passes keep growing thanks to GaaS and AAA games become more and more expensive every generation, so they will end needing extra revenue sources to make their projects less risky.
At the same time, they have around 50M subscribers in their game subscriptions and this number will grow with Spartacus, specifically due to the 2nd tier if as I think will be available worldwide and it's a PS Plus + huge collection of downloadable PS4 (+PS5 in the near future) games, probably the PS Plus collection and all the PS4+PS5 games included in PS Now. And will grow a bit more once it gets released for mobile and smart tvs, and a bit more in a few years once 5G+wifi 6 routers become a bit more popular. But games included there don't generate a lot of revenue, something it can be improved if they are GaaS with many DLCs/IAPs/Season Passes/etc.
This is why they are making a few GaaS games, and if they work in the future will make some more (but at the same time they continue making AAA games without DLC/IAP plus smaller games like Sackboy, Astrobot, remakes, etc).
Last edited:
yurinka
Member
Sony is the best who adapted themselves to the market if they are the ones breaking records selling consoles, selling games for their consoles, selling add-ons (DLC/IAP/season passes) for their consoles, selling game subscriptions and generating revenue for their consoles. Plus their exclusives are the more awarded in the last decade and sell more than they ever sold.
Sony porting a few several years old games to PC from time to time to get extra revenue isn't a desperate move. They aren't desperate when they have been dominating console sales, console games sales, add-on sales, game subscription sales, their 1st party games selling better than ever, generating more revenue than any other console maker in gaming history, etc. It's only another secondary revenue source to secure that the rising costs of AAA games don't end being too risky.
In addition to this, they are the better positioned for emerging markets that have potential to become in the future as VR and game streaming are. They already have a huge catalog, more experience than anyone and nobody claimed to have a bigger userbase than them.
Yes, mobile gaming has more players and generates more revenue than console and PC together. This is why Nintendo, Sony, Microsoft and basically any big console publisher started to show interest on mobile gaming. Regarding F2P, after watching many hits on mobile and PC and seeing that in the gaming overall market (console+PC+mobile) F2P generates more revenue than paid games, they started to bet on it some years ago and shown interest to increase their bet or to start making F2P games.
Last edited:
yurinka
Member
You may not like them, but their services are the best performing ones atm so their implementation is the favorite of most users.
And yes, to give away your games day one on a subscription service that you can get for $1/month creating a new account every month is losing a lot of extra revenue and profits they make by selling them at launch and only putting them on the subscription once their sales cycle is over, plus decreases 3rd party game sales because people spends their time playing on the subscription. In the same way that publishing your exclusives day one on PC make your console less appealing so less people buy it because don't need it, so less people buy less games, addons and services for them.
They keep expanding their services and products offerings (the OP is a proof of this), but made in a way it doesn't hurt their main revenue sources. Which means no 1st party games day one on PS Plus/Now or PC.
Yes, Sony is the best perfoming one in most areas but always there's room for improvement. Regarding to the number of their quality exclusives, they are aggresively hiring in all their gamedev studios and acquiring more studios, plus also making a bigger effort than they ever did on the 2nd and 3rd party exclusives side. It's cutting it for now, and in the future they will release more games per year so will gonna cut it in the long run.
They are growing in console sales, game sales for their consoles, 1st party game sales and awards, game subscriptions and gaming division revenue and posting record numbers in these areas with their current strategy. They won't change this strategy for another one that potentially could hurt these areas. They won't remove their main selling point to sell consoles as would be releasing their games day one on console. And won't reduce the revenue and profitability of their games, for them is better to release the game selling it at $70 and after it sold 10 or 20 million units to put it on a game subscription instead of giving it away putting it day one on a subscription.
In addition to this, their main revenue source is game+addon sales from 3rd party games for their console. If most of their players would be playing all day games from a subscription instead of buying games, it also would hurt the 3rd party sales which would be bad for them and for the 3rd party publishers and indies outside a few ones who got a nice enough moneyhat to be in that subscription.
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 471617
Unconfirmed Member
If the three tiers end up being $10 (PS Plus), $15 (PS Plus and PS4 games) and $20 (PS Plus and basically, PS Now), I don't see where the value or the positives are. At $20, you're basically paying what it currently is now for both PS Plus and PS Now individually so what's the benefit?
Add in no first party games day one or even third party games day one and I just don't see the point of any of this. If Sony is going just for optics by trying to copy Microsoft but aren't all in, why even bother? I don't see any reason to subscribe to any of these tiers unless you're an online multi-player gamer.
Game Pass getting Stalker 2 (forget the timed exclusivity for the moment) and Plague Tale 2 day one in Game Pass for a $10 monthly rental already has all three tiers beat because PS Now is pure shit which is why they're "eliminating" it by reskinning it and PS Plus while better than Games with Gold in regards to the games given every month is still going to be Indies and older games like the Godfall's of the world so compared to Game Pass with only those two games I just mentioned, Game Pass is still far better.
In my eyes, if Sony isn't going all in then why even bother to begin with? Just stay the course with the old outdated antiquated business model and call it a day. SMH.
Add in no first party games day one or even third party games day one and I just don't see the point of any of this. If Sony is going just for optics by trying to copy Microsoft but aren't all in, why even bother? I don't see any reason to subscribe to any of these tiers unless you're an online multi-player gamer.
Game Pass getting Stalker 2 (forget the timed exclusivity for the moment) and Plague Tale 2 day one in Game Pass for a $10 monthly rental already has all three tiers beat because PS Now is pure shit which is why they're "eliminating" it by reskinning it and PS Plus while better than Games with Gold in regards to the games given every month is still going to be Indies and older games like the Godfall's of the world so compared to Game Pass with only those two games I just mentioned, Game Pass is still far better.
In my eyes, if Sony isn't going all in then why even bother to begin with? Just stay the course with the old outdated antiquated business model and call it a day. SMH.
Leyasu
Banned
“Please don’t cry” what are you talking about?
I don’t think you understand what I mean. Your arguments would make sense if every PlayStation owner bought every first party game. As they don’t, then I don’t think that it would have the catastrophic effect that you think it would.
I already said that Sony wouldn’t need to make gaas for a subscription service. Single player games will be more than fine. It is not the type of content, it is the amount of content that counts or brings in the subscribers. Content equals games not the content of the game.
ToTTenTranz
Banned
Well if we look at Plus' past 3 months, it does look like they're actively trying to make Plus look terrible so they can announce a more expensive alternative that has better games.
However, I don't think Sony will ever launch a service that offers, on day-one, their 1st-party behemoths that sell 10-20 million copies at over $50. With 20 million copies sold, Insomniac's Spider Man gave Sony about as much revenue as half a year of Gamepass (probably more considering Gamepass' $1 subscribers, people who bought their Gold codes on a Turkish e-store for 30€/year and then upgraded, etc.).
However, I don't think Sony will ever launch a service that offers, on day-one, their 1st-party behemoths that sell 10-20 million copies at over $50. With 20 million copies sold, Insomniac's Spider Man gave Sony about as much revenue as half a year of Gamepass (probably more considering Gamepass' $1 subscribers, people who bought their Gold codes on a Turkish e-store for 30€/year and then upgraded, etc.).
megreotsugua
Banned
We have this earlier rumor. (timestamped)
It mentions of possibly two separate services:
1. A more robust PS Plus - latest rumor points to this
2. A Sony Entertainment Pass - this is probably still in the oven, needs more planning and backend preparation
We're hearing now about Sony's plans for a more robust PS Plus by basically combining PS+ and PS Now. We're also hearing that PS Now will probably be phased out. Will Sony replace it with this rumored 'Sony Pass'? Note that Netflix is also now adding gaming into their value proposition. A Sony Pass has bigger potential to be mainstream than a pure game streaming service.
Netflix has 200M subs, while Disney got 100M subs in just a year. Sony doesn't need to challenge these streaming giants head to head. They could target a more modest number of subscribers (say 30M - 50M), and adjust their budget for exclusive shows and movies accordingly. Although 30M-50M subs may seem small compared to other streaming giants, that number can never be attained by their current strategy with PS Now.
It mentions of possibly two separate services:
1. A more robust PS Plus - latest rumor points to this
2. A Sony Entertainment Pass - this is probably still in the oven, needs more planning and backend preparation
We're hearing now about Sony's plans for a more robust PS Plus by basically combining PS+ and PS Now. We're also hearing that PS Now will probably be phased out. Will Sony replace it with this rumored 'Sony Pass'? Note that Netflix is also now adding gaming into their value proposition. A Sony Pass has bigger potential to be mainstream than a pure game streaming service.
Netflix has 200M subs, while Disney got 100M subs in just a year. Sony doesn't need to challenge these streaming giants head to head. They could target a more modest number of subscribers (say 30M - 50M), and adjust their budget for exclusive shows and movies accordingly. Although 30M-50M subs may seem small compared to other streaming giants, that number can never be attained by their current strategy with PS Now.
- Sony has thousands of movies both vintage and new that they can shuffle in and out.
- Sony has a lot of successful shows they sell to TV and streaming apps. 'Sony Pass' will be a new customer except for shows paid for by a client to be exclusive.
- SIE paying Sony pictures will cost Sony $0. It's basically a matter of accounting adjustment.
- They can make a few exclusive original shows for this service. (This is where the majority of operating cost will come.)
- Crunchyroll
- Playstation games are not day 1 (Sony games still earn hundreds of millions of dollars on their own, so coming to the service is basically free). It's just a way for Sony to trickle the value of gaming to casuals*.
Last edited:
GeorgPrime
Banned
I will order the service which gets "Crunchyroll" access added.
ToTTenTranz
Banned
Do these guys live in a made-up world?
"Sony can't have anything like Gamepass because they only release 1 or 2 games a year. They can't support it, they'd need a lot of venture capital!"
Sony has been publishing 8 or more games every year. And even if they didn't, do they think Sony's "upgraded Plus" would only release 1st party games in their service despite most games in Plus being 3rd parties?
Do they also think Gamepass only serves games published by Microsoft?
They'd need a lot of venture capital from whom? Sony had around $44B cash-on-hand in the beginning of the year, and announced a $18B investment for pushing their network services and subscriptions.
And then those guys throw a little FUD on the Crunchyroll acquisition as if it had been blocked by the US government.. an acquisition that was completed a couple of months after that podcast.
Geez I heard more nonsense in these 5 minutes I watched from that video than in the last 5 days.
ParaSeoul
Member
Wondering how these guys even got people to believe they're "insiders"
megreotsugua
Banned
I just disregarded their shenanigans.
For whatever it's worth, I think that the Sony Pass idea is a genius move.
Little Chicken
Member
ToTTenTranz
Banned
Of course. I wasn't commenting on your post, just the video.
Your point of an unified entertainment service makes sense, considering Plus itself is already closing in on 50 million subscribers and Sony might be aiming for those subscribers to upgrade to the new service.
I just don't know if the overlap between "people who game on Playstation" and "people who watch Sony movies and Anime and are willing to pay another service beyond Netflix/Prime/Disney+/AppleTV/HBO" is that big. The competition among streaming services is getting brutal.
I just think Sony would do better at unifying Plus with Now and getting better and slightly more recent games in the service. PS Now's library is incredibly lacking IMO.
megreotsugua
Banned
The "people who game on Playstation" should not be part of the venn diagram. It should be for people who love movies and shows and anime. The service will introduce gaming to them while also being one of the reason to say subscribe if gaming eventually become one of the hobbies too.
The "people who game on Playstation" should subscribe to PS Plus. That's Sony's proposition for them.
I agree. They will have to put up a fight. But they have a fighting chance considering that many great show on different streaming services are made by Sony Pictures.
I think they need to do that - combine Plus and Now. And it looks like they're doing that.
What's next after that? How do you introduce gaming to the 2 billion casuals? IMO this 'Sony Pass' is the way to do it. Note that Netflix has also seen the value of gaming and they started introducing them in its service.
IMO it's worth a try. Sony should do it. They need to be bold in their business decisions. It's worth noting that Sony doesn't need to abandon their tried and tested business model in order to pull this off. This is an entirely new thing that could broaden the appeal and reach of their games.
Last edited:
megreotsugua
Banned
All the rumors about Sony's plan all point to them not reinventing the wheel whether it be the tiered PS Plus or the rumored Sony Pass. The only possible exception are the MP games that Sony is cooking right now. Those will most likely be GaaS and monetization heavy. I could seem some of them releasing on the higher tier PS Plus service day one.
PS Plus will continue to be the largest gaming subscription service. And Sony Pass, if they dare to pull that off, could be their means to broaden the reach of their games and potentially pull casual gamers in.
zaanan
Banned
I am confuzed. The guy he was replying to was lumping together a bunch of strawmen that he called Sony fanboys, and saying the only possible reason they don’t want a Sony gamepass is that they don’t like value. What could be more simple-minded than that? And how does JR get banned, and not this clown? Only one I saw “console warring” was the other guy. Serious question.RIPBryank75 , we'll miss you but that last post wasn't a good idea.
Lone Wolf
Member
Microsoft owns Havok Physics engine. They already profit on Sony and many other game companies.
