Support NeoGAF

[nordique]

I honestly thought they'd reduce the price structure. As it stands, this is a worse deal-for-value than Game Pass Ultimate, even taking into account the price difference. You get EA play and cloud gaming as well as PC gaming options with synced saves with Game pass ultimate. I am happy you can get discounted annual memberships and some of us have received PS plus for pretty cheap with give aways or sales, but this structure is not competitive in my opinion overall.

Mind you, I am a multi plat gamer and also gamepass subscriber so it is natural for me to compare this. I will wait and see what the premium service offers in terms of PS4 and PS5 catalogue but the lack of a day 1 type feature for first party games kind of sucks.

My overall impression is I will be sticking with Essential and just getting games on top of that as needed; basically what I'm doing right now. PS only gamers will not care and likely will go for something like the premium service as the new default but I am a bit underwhelmed by this. I anticipated a more aggressive pricing structure or more aggressive benefits in the higher tiers.

 

[LiquidMetal14]

Will there be an upgrade structure for this rod us with years of PS Plus?

 

[ArtHands]

Yikes, Sony's new subscription doubles the price of streaming PlayStation games on PC

The new PlayStation Plus is a terrible deal for PC players.

www.pcgamer.com

When it replaces the existing PS Now streaming service, Premium (the most expensive tier) will be the only one that lets you play PlayStation games on PC.

So to make the most obvious point first: This is a giant price hike for PC players. Currently you can subscribe to PS Now, without an additional PS+ subscription, and you'd be paying $9.99 monthly/$24.99 quarterly/$59.99 for an annual subscription. Accessing PlayStation games on PC is about to double in price.

 

[ReBurn]

You been under a rock? Infinite came in hot, still no co-op, no forge or content path and its end of fucking March? RARE restarted their title called Everwild twice and lead that had been with the studio for a long time left? Undead Labs from Phil Spencer's interview sounds like they are still way away from actually having something to show. The inititiative PD game is still years away with half the studio leaving and Crystal Dynamics developing the game?

Fable is still 2 years away, and we have no clue on even where the game is development wise?

Studios they cultured themselves are the ones Im talking about. Obsidian, BETHESDA and the likes are already established studios who were working on projects before hand. They wont have issues. So those titles I'll just buy.

Where Gamepass looks better in my opinion is when you have Undead labs, Initiaitive, 343, RARE on top of established studios putting put games that are of quality. Right now its select few that I know from past development projects that they will be good. LIke The outer Worlds 2, Avowed. Those guys know how to make games in a timely fashion.

For me content wise Sony is my go to, with things im interested in like Modern warfare 2, Outer Worlds 2 I buy on PC.

No I live in a house

 

[MasterCornholio]

"Jesus, what a load of nonsense" isn't an argument.

And it's not civil, either. Therefore I feel no need to maintain a civil tone, or any modicum of respect.

Can’t say I’m not surprised. Be better when you come back.

 

[ArtHands]

The biggest surprise here really is the PSP games tbh lol


My stance remains the same on this, its not bad for those who like to play those old games, but I don't see enough to really suggest the majority really care THAT much about old titles. So I think most will just get that mid tier to get those PS4 and PS5 games.

If those PS1,PS2, PSP games are downloadable, does that mean they'll have an option to just buy them on PSN?

They should have just add PS1 and PSP games to the current PS Now and rename it PS Plus Essential 2. Now retro gamers on PS4/PS5/PC are made to pay a higher price which comes with features they are unlikely to need, like multiplayer.

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

It uses PS3 hardware blades for now - based on a chipset that's on an outdated process and will only get more expensive to manufacture. As they scale the service (especially if the adoption reaches 10s of millions) this could quickly become unsustainable, so they'd want to move to a virtualized (emulated) solution that runs on the same blades as the rest of library.

Oh OK I see what you were getting at now. Makes sense. They'll need software emulation for PS3 sooner vs later because of costs of still producing Cell chips for server blades. I was thinking about from the consumer end not the server end of things.

I think a lot of people also forget that Microsoft had Xbox 360 backwards compat since the Xbox One. Even the basic launch Xbox One can run 360 games, albeit without the FPS or resolution enhancements that later came on the One X and Series X. So i'd say BC for PS360 era games shouldn't really be alien or too hard.

People can read about how Microsoft did it here, but the tl;dr is that a company can use a lot of tricks and 'special sauce' behind the scenes to get games running in efficient ways, that brute force emulators written by hobby programmers cannot.

The Cell is probably (definitely?) more complex than the Xenon to emulate, but I absolutely believe Sony could do it on PS5. They have pretty good Ryzen CPUs this generation which likely already exceed the RPCS3 emulator requirements.

Maybe Sony should hire some Microsoft software engineers then? I mean Apple's supposedly doing it. If Apple's doing it, it must be worth doing.

Seriously tho, hope they do something. As F Fafalada pointed out they also need a software emulated PS3 for their server blades soon so that they can move the hardware side for that BC to current designs/architectures and not outdated PS3 designs and components getting more expensive to manufacture by the day.

I honestly thought they'd reduce the price structure. As it stands, this is a worse deal-for-value than Game Pass Ultimate, even taking into account the price difference. You get EA play and cloud gaming as well as PC gaming options with synced saves with Game pass ultimate. I am happy you can get discounted annual memberships and some of us have received PS plus for pretty cheap with give aways or sales, but this structure is not competitive in my opinion overall.

Mind you, I am a multi plat gamer and also gamepass subscriber so it is natural for me to compare this. I will wait and see what the premium service offers in terms of PS4 and PS5 catalogue but the lack of a day 1 type feature for first party games kind of sucks.

My overall impression is I will be sticking with Essential and just getting games on top of that as needed; basically what I'm doing right now. PS only gamers will not care and likely will go for something like the premium service as the new default but I am a bit underwhelmed by this. I anticipated a more aggressive pricing structure or more aggressive benefits in the higher tiers.

They can always introduce more features at a later point in time. GamePass wasn't as feature-rich back when it came out as it is now, either. These things take time; plus I don't think Sony really view this as a full-on GamePass competitor currently.

It will be some years before they reach that point and that seems to be 100% by choice. At the end of the day they have to do what works for their business model, right now a full-on GP competitor is antithesis to that model hence they're not doing it. One can be disliking of it while still being understandable.

Yikes, Sony's new subscription doubles the price of streaming PlayStation games on PC

The new PlayStation Plus is a terrible deal for PC players.

www.pcgamer.com

Lol. It kind of sucks in that way, but that's probably also like half a million subscribers at most. At least they roll over current ongoing PS Now subs to PS+ Premium at no extra cost (if the sub is active when the new stuff launches).

The price doubling will suck somewhat for new subscribers, but the terms have been laid out to bare. It may potentially suck a bit for returning subscribers getting converted to the Premium tier once they have to renew under the new terms, but I bet most of them already had PS+ anyway.

For those that didn't, well they can vote with their wallet if they really feel it cuts them out of what was a net benefit. And if there's enough genuine backlash, Sony might offer some kind of sub perks for PC PS Now users but, again, they still get it at their current price along with the Premium perks until they have to renew, then they pay the new price, so it's not like they're suddenly paying $18/mo or even $120/year (if they go annually).

 

[Papacheeks]

No I live in a house

What’s it made out of straw?

 

[Beechos]

Definately a missed opportunity. Sony couldve leveraged their crunchyroll, sony movie/music catalog into this as a sony ultimate sub. Something like that wouldve been way more appealing to me get rid of a couple of subs with one.

 

[Beechos]

I’d like to know this as well. My subscription is good until 2024. I actually wouldn’t mind paying extra for Premium if they discounted and converted it.

If its anything like their cross gen upgrades/save state transfers not smoothly at all with a lot of confusion.

 

[kyliethicc]

So I have PS+ prepaid till 2026..........how are they gonna handle me wanting a higher tier?

I assume you can upgrade and pay the difference.

4 years of PS+ Extra costs $40 more x4 years = $160.

Idk just a guess.

 

[ArtHands]

Oh OK I see what you were getting at now. Makes sense. They'll need software emulation for PS3 sooner vs later because of costs of still producing Cell chips for server blades. I was thinking about from the consumer end not the server end of things.



Maybe Sony should hire some Microsoft software engineers then? I mean Apple's supposedly doing it. If Apple's doing it, it must be worth doing.

Seriously tho, hope they do something. As F Fafalada pointed out they also need a software emulated PS3 for their server blades soon so that they can move the hardware side for that BC to current designs/architectures and not outdated PS3 designs and components getting more expensive to manufacture by the day.



They can always introduce more features at a later point in time. GamePass wasn't as feature-rich back when it came out as it is now, either. These things take time; plus I don't think Sony really view this as a full-on GamePass competitor currently.

It will be some years before they reach that point and that seems to be 100% by choice. At the end of the day they have to do what works for their business model, right now a full-on GP competitor is antithesis to that model hence they're not doing it. One can be disliking of it while still being understandable.



Lol. It kind of sucks in that way, but that's probably also like half a million subscribers at most. At least they roll over current ongoing PS Now subs to PS+ Premium at no extra cost (if the sub is active when the new stuff launches).

The price doubling will suck somewhat for new subscribers, but the terms have been laid out to bare. It may potentially suck a bit for returning subscribers getting converted to the Premium tier once they have to renew under the new terms, but I bet most of them already had PS+ anyway.

For those that didn't, well they can vote with their wallet if they really feel it cuts them out of what was a net benefit. And if there's enough genuine backlash, Sony might offer some kind of sub perks for PC PS Now users but, again, they still get it at their current price along with the Premium perks until they have to renew, then they pay the new price, so it's not like they're suddenly paying $18/mo or even $120/year (if they go annually).

That's exactly the point. Instead of improving the service to drive up subscribers, they made it worse. 8 years later and PS Now is STILL not available in Asia. Except Japan on console only and not PC.

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

That's exactly the point. Instead of improving the service to drive up subscribers, they made it worse. 8 years later and PS Now is STILL not available in Asia. Except Japan on console only and not PC.

From what I'm hearing part of the reason they've done this revision is to get PS Now into more regions like parts of Asia. But I don't know if that's actually true, or just talk.

 

[ArtHands]

From what I'm hearing part of the reason they've done this revision is to get PS Now into more regions like parts of Asia. But I don't know if that's actually true, or just talk.

I've been hearing that for many years. Not getting my hope up. I'll just be emulating their games on Duckstation / PCSX2 or something with internal upscale rendering and other enhancements.

Update: no wait, I saw that PC streaming is coming to Japan in future update. Hopefully this is true now.

 

[Fake]

 

[CrustyBritches]

Yikes, Sony's new subscription doubles the price of streaming PlayStation games on PC

The new PlayStation Plus is a terrible deal for PC players.

www.pcgamer.com

I pay $50-60/yr for PSNow on PC. That's barely worth it. Having to pay more than GP Ultimate without modern games, without day-1, and let's be honest you're lucky to get games year-1 on PSNow, and without the ability to download is a joke. They don't even have a search bar in this app and they think it's worth that much?

 

[Jaybe]

tbh, they'd be better off just porting all the best titles and moving on.

This. Especially since they have started to embrace PC which would help with the return on the effort should they release them there as well. Curious how many greatest hits are out there to covert. They should take it seriously to finally get past one glaring omission on their service. Thought I suspect they’ve run these numbers and reviewed data they have access to.

 

[SportsFan581]

I pay $50-60/yr for PSNow on PC. That's barely worth it. Having to pay more than GP Ultimate without modern games, without day-1, and let's be honest you're lucky to get games year-1 on PSNow, and without the ability to download is a joke. They don't even have a search bar in this app and they think it's worth that much?

I'm in the same spot. Though I do still have the good old PS4 at the moment. I stacked a few years with some cheap sub $30 keys I found when the 1yr cards went MIA in Europe, maybe they will be embracing PC/Streaming in a better way by the time my sub expires.

 

[Ozzie666]

It feels incredibly lazy for what it is. PS1, PSP and most of PS2 emulation is pretty trivial. They are already streaming PS3 with hardware. Where is the effort? where is PS3 true emulation or VITA emulation? Too much work? This seems cobbled together, as people have said they could have rolled in Crunchy role, or added some PC releases. I'll hold judgment until I see the 400 games. But for the most part it seems like Sony gave away very little with a cost to their side of the business.

I'm curious how much 3rd parties will be represented in this, since companies like Capcom and Square for example, prefer to re-release/remake and recharge.

No excuse for the lack of a professional grade PS3 emulation solution, since non professionals are doing it fairly well, without official documentation.

Lazy, greed, rushed or desperation - can't decide which applies, can't see the value just yet.

 

[CrustyBritches]

I'm in the same spot. Though I do still have the good old PS4 at the moment. I stacked a few years with some cheap sub $30 keys I found when the 1yr cards went MIA in Europe, maybe they will be embracing PC/Streaming in a better way by the time my sub expires.

It's a bummer. It feels like they just ditched all PC-only subscribers.

 

[dotnotbot]

John is a rare exception of a gamer that still has large collection of older Playstation systems and games. Most of gamers don't collect games and get rid of older consoles as soon as a new one comes out, even if the new one isn't backwards compatible (I remember countless posts of people regretting selling their PS3 when the PS4 came out).

So for John this is useless but if the collection of legacy games is big and there are some notable improvements, they will easily find customers.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

Definately a missed opportunity. Sony couldve leveraged their crunchyroll, sony movie/music catalog into this as a sony ultimate sub. Something like that wouldve been way more appealing to me get rid of a couple of subs with one.

"Couldve"?

Sony didn't do it because they don't want to do it. It's better to keep a card up your sleeve for when you think you do need it.

 

[crazepharmacist]

Can we get Warhawk for the PS3 streaming tier? Please.

 

[Mattyp]

Locking PS1/PS2 backwards compat that we where told was never possible to just release even after the emulator was mined behind the most expensive pay wall.

These cunts are the deadset worst people in the industry. Absolute cancer.

I expect nothing else at this point however from what used to be my favourite company.

 

[Swift_Star]

Yup.

All they really did was make a mid tier option in hopes people reluctant to go all the way PS+ and PS Now, instead buy that mid tier sub plan. And currently, most gamers shun PS Now like the plague.

As crazy as it seems, people rag on MS for sub plans, yet Sony now has 3 of them. It's like they are trying to be a cell phone plan operator with a tons of plans hoping one sticks with a customer. You never now a few years from now they might have 5 tiers.

that makes literally no sense. It’s one service with 3 tiers. It’s not that hard to understand.

 

[Swift_Star]

Yikes, Sony's new subscription doubles the price of streaming PlayStation games on PC

The new PlayStation Plus is a terrible deal for PC players.

www.pcgamer.com

This is false. They don’t know that. They didn’t say anything about the pc version of now.

 

[NeoLed]

This is false. They don’t know that. They didn’t say anything about the pc version of now.

Actually that is true until Sony clarify

Edit: for better comprehension

 

[noise36]

Trash offering as expected.

 

[Hoppa]

Streaming games seems dated to me and I haven’t even tried it before. Meh.

 

[MScarpa]

Ok so I'm having a look at PSNow today:

- 16 PS2 Titles
- Over 500 PS3 titles
- Around 400 PS4 titles

They're promoting saying:

700+ games -> (it already has more)
Adds a catalog of up to 400* of the most enjoyable PS4 and PS5 games -> Ok because there isn't any PS5 game I guess (correct me if I'm wrong)

Then:
Adds up to 340* additional games, including:
PS3 games available via cloud streaming
A catalog of beloved classic games available in both streaming and download options from the original PlayStation, PS2 and PSP generations

-> considering we ALREADY have over 500 PS3 titles on PSNOW.

Whats the catch?

This is what I was trying to understand. Are they pulling off old stuff and putting on newer games. I have PSNOW and actually enjoy it but if they're just going to not make many changes game wise then kinda meh. I don't know, hopefully I'm wrong but we will see.

 

[MonarchJT]

GamePass probably IS worth $10 per month.

Too bad GamePass isn't $10 per month.

You have to make up your mind Toad ...... for you sometimes gamepass costs $ 1 by making new accounts and Microsoft will never make money ... other times it becomes too expensive and not worth its cost, changing depending on how you want to badmouth the service. Said this:

Xbox Game Pass added more than $6,300 of games in 2021

Xbox Game Pass added more than $6,300 of games in 2021

After some intense calculations we have put into perspective just why Xbox Game Pass is one of the best deals in gaming history

www.theloadout.com

 

[MonarchJT]

PS+ and PS Now currently pull in around $ 3.7 billion per year.

If 10% of current PS+ subs upgrade to PS+ Extra,
and 10% of current PS+ subs upgrade to PS+ Premium,
they could grow annual subscription revenue by over 40%.

Could increase sub revenue by over $ 1 billion per year (without any new subscribers.)

And now they have 1 simple sub service with double the sub count of the competition.

Pretty clever move by Sony if it works.

Sony will be looking to make more money on in service which remains subpar compared to the competition . Too bad for the users.
People were somehow asking for a rival to Gamepass or at least give the appearance of doing so.... people don't give a damn about how Sony closes fiscal years

 

[MScarpa]

Sony will be looking to make more money on in service which remains subpar compared to the competition. Too bad for the users.

It's not a bad service at all. Especially for what it is. If they can support it a little better with some newer games that would be great. For the last year though, it's felt like an afterthought, especially since Sony will release PS PLUS games, and then the next month, drop them on PSNOW.

 

[CrustyBritches]

This is false. They don’t know that. They didn’t say anything about the pc version of now.

They've said PSNow will cease to exist as a standalone service and that current subscriptions will be converted to an equivalent subscription plan in the new PlayStation Plus service.

 

[Novacain]

There's not much exciting here, they are just rebranding psnow as a psplus tier. What I do like is they added more choice as psnow was an all or nothing subscription.

 

[THE DUCK]

You have to make up your mind Toad ...... for you sometimes gamepass costs $ 1 by making new accounts and Microsoft will never make money ... other times it becomes too expensive and not worth its cost, changing depending on how you want to badmouth the service. Said this:

Xbox Game Pass added more than $6,300 of games in 2021

Xbox Game Pass added more than $6,300 of games in 2021

After some intense calculations we have put into perspective just why Xbox Game Pass is one of the best deals in gaming history

www.theloadout.com

What does Toad know about gamepass anyhow, doesn't even know how much it costs.

 

[MonarchJT]

It's not a bad service at all. Especially for what it is. If they can support it a little better with some newer games that would be great. For the last year though, it's felt like an afterthought, especially since Sony will release PS PLUS games, and then the next month, drop them on PSNOW.

honestly having been forced to have it for the entire PS4 generation I am convinced that if they would remove multiplayer from Ps +, subscribers to the service would immediately collapse. Same thing for the new tiers ... they are forcing those who have to forcibly pay for multiplayer in a whole new tier series ... to save psnow this time
The service aside from giving you the chance to play multiplayer isn't worth that money

and when tomorrow the user numbers of the new ps+ will grow because the number of PS5 users will grow and so the users who will be forced to pay for multiplayer .. they will show it as a win of the service. But that's not it

 

[StreetsofBeige]

By the sounds of the tiers (and what kyliethicc replied to me last page), this is basically the hyped up 3-tiered Spartacus (assuming you do the annual plan pricing):

1. Essential. No change vs PS+. $60/yr just like now

2. Extra. PS+ and offers PS4/PS5 games like PS Now. $100/yr

3. Premium. PS+ and their revamped PS Now service. The streaming and/or downloadable games from all systems: PS1, PS2, PS3, PS4, PS5, PSP. Includes game trial for some games. Access on PC only available on this tier. $120/yr which is the same as now buying PS+ and PS Now at $60 each

The games included in Extra/Premium are unknown as the number count is changed upwards. So no idea yet what games get added or deleted with exception of them mentioning some games like GOW, Returnal, Miles etc... are added for Extra/Premium.

If you are strictly a PS+ gamer now. It's zero change to service and price.

If you are interested in a sub plan with games, you got two new tiers to pick from.

 

[supernova8]

Just like with Game Pass, surely the proof is in the pudding. Pudding here being the actual games available. I saw here:

At launch, we plan to include titles such as Death Stranding, God of War, Marvel’s Spider-Man, Marvel’s Spider-Man: Miles Morales, Mortal Kombat 11, and Returnal.

I could be wrong but that may imply that it won't include titles like Demons Souls, Ratchet & Clank, Gran Turismo 7, which sucks ass. Maybe those will be on Premium? Maybe it'll be like typical third party games when they only seem to go onto Game Pass when (presumably) their normal sales have dropped off.

As for PS3, I really don't give a shit. Just like I don't give a shit about Xbox 360 games.

I'm in Japan and if I can get access to most decent PS4 and PS5 Playstation titles for about 10,000 yen per year, I'll call that a victory considering that individual games (new) cost like 6,000 yen each and a lot of used games annoyingly keep their value. Alternatively, I can subscribe on and off when I want to really binge and push through a few games and get even better value for money.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

Unless I didn't see it, what if a PS gamer wants to just buy PS Now, but not PS+ (for general MP gaming)? Is their a tier for that, or is that still doable?

 

[Topher]

Unless I didn't see it, what if a PS gamer wants to just buy PS Now, but not PS+ (for general MP gaming)? Is their a tier for that, or is that still doable?

Not doable. You've got three tiers and that's it.

 

[EDMIX]

This. Especially since they have started to embrace PC which would help with the return on the effort should they release them there as well. Curious how many greatest hits are out there to covert. They should take it seriously to finally get past one glaring omission on their service. Thought I suspect they’ve run these numbers and reviewed data they have access to.

Agreed. imho the best titles on PS3 already get ported or remade or remastered anyway. Of course a few hold outs didn't get ports that I feel should, 3D Dot Hero, Folklore, MGS4 etc

If Sony themselves are able to port the majority of their own classic line up and simply give a free version to those who bought it off PSN on PS3 or something, I think it would solve a lot of this. I still us my PS3 and its one of my favorite systems, but I'd say majority of my favorite PS3 titles, came to PS4 or PS5 as ports, remakes anyway. I don't really return for too much on that platform that doesn't already have a better version, MGS4 might be the title I return to the most (not even a Sony title lol)

So I'd expect like a Killzone collection, Resistance Collection, Ratchet etc

 

[MonarchJT]

Unless I didn't see it, what if a PS gamer wants to just buy PS Now, but not PS+ (for general MP gaming)? Is their a tier for that, or is that still doable?

you will not be able to anymore and you will find yourself having to pay a lot more if you are a PC Gamer and wanted to use Psnow to try PlayStation games on PC

 

[MScarpa]

honestly having been forced to have it for the entire PS4 generation I am convinced that if they would remove multiplayer from Ps +, subscribers to the service would immediately collapse. Same thing for the new tiers ... they are forcing those who have to forcibly pay for multiplayer in a whole new tier series ... to save psnow this time
The service aside from giving you the chance to play multiplayer isn't worth that money

and when tomorrow the user numbers of the new ps+ will grow because the number of PS5 users will grow and so the users who will be forced to pay for multiplayer .. they will show it as a win of the service. But that's not it

Doesn't surprise me much though. Sony's philosophy this generation is to nickel and dime their base, and it sucks. So any game i buy from them is used. Just what it is.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

Just like with Game Pass, surely the proof is in the pudding. Pudding here being the actual games available. I saw here:


I could be wrong but that may imply that it won't include titles like Demons Souls, Ratchet & Clank, Gran Turismo 7, which sucks ass. Maybe those will be on Premium? Maybe it'll be like typical third party games when they only seem to go onto Game Pass when (presumably) their normal sales have dropped off.

As for PS3, I really don't give a shit. Just like I don't give a shit about Xbox 360 games.

I'm in Japan and if I can get access to most decent PS4 and PS5 Playstation titles for about 10,000 yen per year, I'll call that a victory considering that individual games (new) cost like 6,000 yen each and a lot of used games annoyingly keep their value. Alternatively, I can subscribe on and off when I want to really binge and push through a few games and get even better value for money.

I dont think overall sub plans will increase a lot.

Essential is the same PS+ at the same price. So that is no change. So it comes down to if the mid and premium tiers can upsell existing gamers to a higher tier or get gamers with no sub plan at all to bite at one of the better tiers right off the bat.

I don't think the sub count will change much aside from natural annual growth. But the revenue will boost automatically a certain amount as some existing PS+ gamers jump up tiers. I don't think jumping to premium will happen that much. It's really not much different than someone buying PS+ and PS Now, but it will have lots of legacy games added to it. But I can see a bunch going from standard PS+ to mid tier.

It's not like PS Now currently has tons of subs, so it shows hardly anyone is buying PS+ and PS Now combined. And some PS Now subbers are standalone. And from what Topher and MonarchJT replied to me above, there's not even a standalone PS Now going forward. So those portion of gamers will either ditch their PS Now sub plan, or perhaps amp up to mid or premium tier.

This looks more like a revenue growth model based on price, then a revenue model based on unit count. All they are really doing is slicing up a pie into more pieces. And the more people who boost to any better tier will lead to more mtx revenue as they'll have more games to dabble with from the catalogue.

 

[Robb]

Not a fan of streaming games.. I also hope they change their mind on the first party offerings in the long run.

 

[Chukhopops]

Aw c'mon man that's not fair . PS Now has a lot more games so naturally that'd affect the MC average. Plus some games might not even have MC entries, especially some PS1 games.

GamePass does have a pretty good MC average, higher than some give it credit for (when they try saying it's mostly fodder), but that average would probably be a bit lower if they simply had more games on the service. Though it does also show content curation is mostly pretty good...outside of some bombs (CrossFire X).

There are 72 games on PSNow which have no MC but they are not counted as zero in the MC calculation, they are not counted at all. Chances are they are not very good and would not move the average up.

I actually think Sony will clear out some of the bad games currently available and that’s why they target 740 games instead of the 820 they have today (speculation on my side though).

I think catalogue size in itself is not a criteria when people pay for a subscription.

 

[Heisenberg007]

Yikes, Sony's new subscription doubles the price of streaming PlayStation games on PC

The new PlayStation Plus is a terrible deal for PC players.

www.pcgamer.com

Makes sense. It's PS+ not PC+.

A PS product, offering better value to PS userbase, would take priority. Of course, PC will be part of the equation, but when finalizing a strategy, they wouldn't be the focal point. Such a weird, illogical article.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

Makes sense. It's PS+ not PC+.

A PS product, offering better value to PS userbase, would take priority. Of course, PC will be part of the equation, but when finalizing a strategy, they wouldn't be the focal point. Such a weird, illogical article.

How is it a better value to standalone PS Now gamers, when they now have to buy Extra or Premium going forward to get streamed/downloadable games?

 

[Heisenberg007]

How is it a better value to standalone PS Now gamers, when they now have to buy Extra or Premium going forward to get streamed/downloadable games?

It's not for those 3.2 million PS Now users because there won't be a PS Now service after this. It's being deprecated.

But it's better value for the 48 million PS+ users.