Support NeoGAF

[James Sawyer Ford]

I think the reason why you might be losing people with this argument is that most people here just care about the AAA games nowadays. Fancy cinematics, big setpieces, epic scale.... basically you started the whole Sony first party AAA trend with God of War which is now become Sony's blueprint for all first party games.

So while it's great that MS is able to make indie games like Medium and B games like Outriders reach an audience they wouldnt otherwise, most people who are fans of GoW, TLOU and Uncharted, are like wtf when do we get those games from Gamepass? I mean Gamepass is almost 4 years old now and aside from Gears of War 5, I cant think of a single big AAA game from them. Let alone a GOTY contender. To use your own analogy, where is their Terminator 2? Or Jurassic Park?

I am sure they will come but people can list the last four years of $60 sony first party games against the last 4 years of day one gamepass releases and it wont even be close. With games taking longer and longer to make, are we ok with paying $180 a year for one Halo caliber game a year plus some forgettable 90s romps and indies?

thats just the thing....

most people that love the idea of GamePass do so because of the allure of having Halo, Gears, Forza, Fable, Starfield, Doom, Hellblade, etc... DAY 1

its not about “the medium” or whatever. It wouldn’t even be in the conversation if that’s what it was about

 

[The Alien]

"Concern".

Lol.

 

[SafeOrAlone]

Jaffe drank the Game Pass kool aid. Hope you're enjoying the plethora of last gen games at your disposal davidjaffe

Considering the drought of exclusive next gen games we currently have, I'm loving the plethora of last gen games, upgraded with frame boost & auto HDR, and a shared ecosystem where all your friends have access to the same games.

It's been a godsend for the early days of this gen. Demon's Souls and Returnal over 6 months, wasn't enough to outshine GP on Series X, for me.

The big games are coming starting later this year. Halo Infinite first, Starfield next year. And those are just the first party titles. The argument that GP games are of lesser quality is about to become a literal meme.

People did a similar song&dance when PS3 was finally having a comeback. There were all these stale accusations that PS3 had no games, even when the tables had clearly turned to anyone paying attention.
In the early days of 360, games like Bioshock and Mass Effect were Xbox exclusives. We can't forget that Xbox was squeezing the life out of Playstation with the same type of moves Sony makes today. That's where some of that "PS has no games" sentiment was born from, before those exclusivities ended and Sony started rolling out hits like Uncharted 2.

 

[GuinGuin]

This concern about game releases or GOTY contender stuff has nothing to do with the business model of subscription services. In a world where Sony offered the same thing, I don't believe Naughty Dog would be making less quality games because of a business model.

They would be given a smaller budget because without subsidizing the cost it wouldn't make financial sense to spend hundreds of millions to add just one more game to a subscription service.

 

[Dr Bass]

I'm ok for riskier games going to sub services because then we will get some innovation and new stuff rather than the same old sequel and rehashes year after year.

I still don't understand the argument that subscriptions enable riskier games.

Typically speaking lowered production values and cheaper prices enable riskier games. I still think this is improperly conflating risk with subscriptions. And why should MS (or whoever controls the service) get to decide what risks to take? We are in an era of fantastic tools availability for small teams with an idea and anyone can put out a game on PC or Mac. These platforms have worked for decades, and still work.

Again, I don't see how GP isn't the subsidized Hail Mary pass I said it was. And I still don't see how it relates to creative gameplay. In fact, I would argue we've seen the opposite, so far, from the service. Look at what they did to Battletoads. Look at the games announced so far. Sequel after unneeded sequel (Perfect Dark? Fable? These things were already on the downslide when they were last seen).

Contrast that with something like Stray, a game whose contemporary I can't personally recall. Or even the aforementioned Returnal, which IMO is very creative and executed to near perfection. These are risk taking games enabled by charging on a per title basis.

 

[SlimySnake]

then the game loses a significant amount of appeal with a much lower budget.

what was so damned amazing about death stranding is that it had the weird indie gameplay in an absolutely mesmerizing AAA production. You get completely lost and absorbed into that world in a way that wouldn’t be possible without a huge team backing up Kojima

This. A huge part of the appeal of DS were the amazing visuals especially the cutscenes. The entire last hour of the game is cutscenes, and those flashback cutscenes are arguably the most stunning visuals ever put in a video game. Pretty much the entire story is hanging on that flashback and I dont think the game hits those high emotional notes if it wasn't for Mads' performance, the koji pro animators and cutscene directors.

I remember reading some youtube comments on a death stranding video and there were a lot of dads talking about hugging their kids or wanting to lol after watching that ending. I felt the same exact way. I really dont know if I could get that from a game like Gone Home or Ori.

 

[Bumblebeetuna]

No, it's not, you can't possibly argue that Superman 64 is as good as Super Mario Odyssey just because someone liked it. Personal variation does not remove the idea of quality products.

Yeah except you’re comparing something widely regarded as one of if not the worst games of all time to one widely regarded as one of the best. What a stupid comparison

This is exactly why it’s pointless. Also notice I listed Ozark, a series known to be of high quality to other series known to be of high quality. You act like I compared The Wire to The Ridiculous 6

 

[Dr Bass]

This concern about game releases or GOTY contender stuff has nothing to do with the business model of subscription services. In a world where Sony offered the same thing, I don't believe Naughty Dog would be making less quality games because of a business model.

Sony has already said a subscription service doesn't make financial sense when making the kinds of games they make. They've explicitly stated that, so you're not correct.

Sony: Putting new games on a subscription service like Game Pass “doesn’t make any sense” | TheSixthAxis

Sony's Jim Ryan has said The PlayStation Plus Collection, one of the big surprises from last night, is not meant to be a competitor to the Xbox Games

www.thesixthaxis.com

 

[reinking]

No one is talking about streaming tho.

You're right. (obviously since it is your video) but one of the big sell for subs is streaming too. I probably should have tied it in before just jumping into streaming.

 

[elliot5]

They would be given a smaller budget because without subsidizing the cost it wouldn't make financial sense to spend hundreds of millions to add just one more game to a subscription service.

Would it not? I would think AAA 200M budget games are unsustainable because if it comes out with a stinker or needs constant delays and reworks, then not having the "safety net" of a monthly sub and other studios essentially subsidizing your project, runs the risk of you getting shuttered after one bad release.

If TLOU Pt 2 cost 200M to make over ... what? 6 years? And Game Pass has roughly 23M subs at $10+ a piece (not withstanding promotions and shit). That's one TLOUpt2 in a single month and then some. And it only grows the more people sub to the service.

Not being tied to the traditional release model of sales to keep your studio afloat and running projects sounds pretty good to me. With the added bonus of giving smaller studios a platform.

 

[elliot5]

Sony has already said a subscription service doesn't make financial sense when making the kinds of games they make. They've explicitly stated that, so you're not correct.

Sony: Putting new games on a subscription service like Game Pass “doesn’t make any sense” | TheSixthAxis

Sony's Jim Ryan has said The PlayStation Plus Collection, one of the big surprises from last night, is not meant to be a competitor to the Xbox Games

www.thesixthaxis.com

"Financial sense" to Sony doesn't equate to the quality of a game made.

 

[Dr Bass]

"Financial sense" to Sony doesn't equate to the quality of a game made.

it completely does when it takes a certain amount of money (acquiring the best talent, and giving them the time necessary) to achieve a certain amount of quality. I don't think you understand the nature of software development, because your statement really doesn't make any kind of sense.

 

[Zeroing]

The thing with services is, the software is not yours anymore for example Adobe suite - that’s the comparison everyone should be using! Games are software !
The thing that happened with Adobe suite when become a service was, lack of quality and fees for everything! Migration fees, cancellation fees.
Once you are bound to a service things stop being in your control!

 

[GuinGuin]

Would it not? I would think AAA 200M budget games are unsustainable because if it comes out with a stinker or needs constant delays and reworks, then not having the "safety net" of a monthly sub and other studios essentially subsidizing your project, runs the risk of you getting shuttered after one bad release.

If TLOU Pt 2 cost 200M to make over ... what? 6 years? And Game Pass has roughly 23M subs at $10+ a piece (not withstanding promotions and shit). That's one TLOUpt2 in a single month and then some. And it only grows the more people sub to the service.

Not being tied to the traditional release model of sales to keep your studio afloat and running projects sounds pretty good to me. With the added bonus of giving smaller studios a platform.

Most of those subs are discounted though. They also pay millions for the third party content. It's in not pure profit.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

Would it not? I would think AAA 200M budget games are unsustainable because if it comes out with a stinker or needs constant delays and reworks, then not having the "safety net" of a monthly sub and other studios essentially subsidizing your project, runs the risk of you getting shuttered after one bad release.

If TLOU Pt 2 cost 200M to make over ... what? 6 years? And Game Pass has roughly 23M subs at $10+ a piece (not withstanding promotions and shit). That's one TLOUpt2 in a single month and then some. And it only grows the more people sub to the service.

Not being tied to the traditional release model of sales to keep your studio afloat and running projects sounds pretty good to me. With the added bonus of giving smaller studios a platform.

23 million people aren't paying $10 a month unless games like TLOU2 or equivilient are coming out regurarly

It's the same issue I see with Netflix

Their growth looks great on paper when they're spending so much on content to retain their userbase and grow it but it's causing them to lose money

But if they don't they can't retain that userbase and growth stagnates

 

[Bo_Hazem]

Would it not? I would think AAA 200M budget games are unsustainable because if it comes out with a stinker or needs constant delays and reworks, then not having the "safety net" of a monthly sub and other studios essentially subsidizing your project, runs the risk of you getting shuttered after one bad release.

If TLOU Pt 2 cost 200M to make over ... what? 6 years? And Game Pass has roughly 23M subs at $10+ a piece (not withstanding promotions and shit). That's one TLOUpt2 in a single month and then some. And it only grows the more people sub to the service.

Not being tied to the traditional release model of sales to keep your studio afloat and running projects sounds pretty good to me. With the added bonus of giving smaller studios a platform.

I hope you're not serious. GamePass has 100+ games not one TLOU2 game per month, and PS Now has 850+ games as well. All these games bleed money to keep. If anything this proves that PS Plus makes more sense financially in comparison.

Also most of those 23M are paying $1-3/mo for 3 years.

 

[skakmk]

IMO the best quality films were the ones released in theatres and subsequently added to subscription services in a few months (3-4 months) time.

Bringing this concept to games, the FOMO/bragger gamers can continue to enjoy their day one purchases at a discount of maybe 20% for subscribing and the gaming Companies can claim high initial sales, while the value gamers can get their moneys worth. The Companies can then plan DLC's - post adding the game to subscription.

The greatest benefits for Companies going this route will be fixed revenue. We all know that people never unsubscribe from quality subscription services.

 

[elliot5]

Most of those subs are discounted though. They also pay millions for the third party content. It's in not pure profit.

23 million people aren't paying $10 a month unless games like TLOU2 or equivilient are coming out regurarly

holy fuck I know that that's why I added the ( ). As the service grows, more and more people will be paying the typical amount, or even more via Ultimate. It's a long term business plan.

 

[GuinGuin]

Yeah except you’re comparing something widely regarded as one of if not the worst games of all time to one widely regarded as one of the best. What a stupid comparison

This is exactly why it’s pointless. Also notice I listed Ozark, a series known to be of high quality to other series known to be of high quality. You act like I compared The Wire to The Ridiculous 6

All these Netflix comparisons are bad. 200 million plus subs. More than any gaming sub service will ever get at $15/mo and they still can't make any money. They also aren't some indie machine. They target the lowest common denominator with Adam Sandler and Marvel shows/movies trying to get the mo t bang for their buck.

 

[megreotsugua]

Just sell it for $5 like Among Us and hope to get lucky like they did.

Or let the game stand alone for a while and test its success on its own. The subscription services could be a fallback.

Rocket League was barely successful until it was offered in PS Plus.

If the measure of success is the number of players, then all games that released on PS Plus were successful. Days Gone found a lot of players through PS Plus.

What Jaffe is saying that sub services could allow small games to reach more audience is true. But it doesn't need a day 1 gamepass model to achieve that.

 

[GuinGuin]

holy fuck I know that that's why I added the ( ). As the service grows, more and more people will be paying the typical amount, or even more via Ultimate. It's a long term business plan.

Or those people will cancel when their discounted rate ends....

 

[Dr Bass]

23 million people aren't paying $10 a month unless games like TLOU2 or equivilient are coming out regurarly

Not only that, that money even if it did exist would be spread across all of their internal studios, as well as used in making deals with 3rd parties. There seems to be this idea that it's all just free money rolling in and everything else is taking care of itself. I don't believe Zenimax was in a very good place (hence why they were looking to be acquired) before MS came around, so why would they be better off doing the same kind of work, but now not even selling their software?

I know I buy more than two games per year. Microsoft basically wants me to spend less money to support more studios based on their model. Again, if anyone can explain this without using the old stupid adage of they just need more people to sign up ("We lose money on every deal ... so how do we make up for it? Volume" It's an old joke about the silliness of this kind of thing) I'd love to hear it.

It's funny this keeps coming up, and this board goes in circles on it. I've yet to see a cogent argument for how GP is beneficial for the industry as a whole.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

holy fuck I know that that's why I added the ( ). As the service grows, more and more people will be paying the typical amount, or even more via Ultimate. It's a long term business plan.

Only if you keep spending absurd amounts of money to keep that userbase from unsubscribing.

With Sony's current output, a sub service would not work.

 

[skakmk]

Bojack Horseman
Orange is the new Black
The Irishman
Ozark
Narcos
The Crown

these just don’t exist

And we probable wouldn't have cared for gems like dark, money heist and peaky blinders if It wasn't for Netflix.

 

[GuinGuin]

Or let the game stand alone for a while and test its success on its own. The subscription services could be a fallback.

Rocket League was barely successful until it was offered in PS Plus.

If the measure of success is the number of players, then all games that released on PS Plus were successful. Days Gone found a lot of players through PS Plus.

What Jaffe is saying that sub services could allow small games to reach more audience is true. But it doesn't need a day 1 gamepass model to achieve that.

Rocket League was offered day 1 on Playstation Plus.

 

[Bryank75]

The simple fact is that gaming is a huge industry (in terms of content) and Gamepass can only accommodate so much of that.....

People only have so much time, Gamepass suits some people but not the majority. In big-picture terms it also limits choice because as I stated before: time is limited and you are less likely to buy new games if you have enough on Gamepass.

I constantly see the phrase 'when will it come to gamepass', on twitter and several other places online.

Gamepass will never be able to deliver the breadth of content that a well curated store can.

Microsoft is the right company to explore the viability of gamepass, they can easily subsidize it and have a great infrastructure to support it and an existing base.

With PlayStation already way ahead in hardware sales this generation and I see them pulling even further ahead as time goes on, it is essential for Xbox to find its niche.... if it doesn't I can see Microsoft losing interest in gaming and that would result in gaming losing huge inward investment and spending.

The poll here also shows that there is no appetite to pay above 200 dollars for a subscription service and most people do not want a sub-service at all..... so the minute inflation or costs go up, the effect is not going to be one less game bought..... it will be dropping the entire subscription. It's an 'all or nothing' situation.

 

[fart town usa]

I don't understand the concern at all with game pass. It seems like it's always being talked about.

Either subscribe or don't, where's the issue?

 

[Dr Bass]

I don't understand the concern at all with game pass. It seems like it's always being talked about.

Either subscribe or don't, where's the issue?

It reminds me of how a certain subset of Apple fans told everyone iPad was the "future of computing" when it released, even though it obviously wasn't. And this insistence that if you didn't think so you were mired in the past or had a lack of vision. I would argue that seeing beyond hype and having a good intuition for what people actually want shows you actually have better vision than people who glom onto the most recent thing in an effort to look smart. Ten years later and the iPad is a pretty cool also-ran, just as expected at it's launch.

Bottom line, there is a certain subset of GP fans (not speaking about Jaffe here) who are shouting at every opportunity that it is the future, MS is around the corner from domination, and you better learn to love it or you're screwed. It's why a GP specific thread was created, because everything thread was being derailed into the arguments you see here, and it just goes in circles.

 

[TBiddy]

I don't understand the concern at all with game pass. It seems like it's always being talked about.

Either subscribe or don't, where's the issue?

It's from Microsoft. Some people see it as their duty to bash anything from that camp.

But I agree. It's a fucking service. Noone gives a shit about Stadia, Geforce Now, PS Now and the other streaming services, but when the Microsoft brand is slapped on it... hoooo boy.

 

[elliot5]

Why put it on GamePass or PSNow though? Just sell it for $5 like Among Us and hope to get lucky like they did. From what I've heard the money from these subscription services is a crap shoot too. Some devs get a lot. Some get a little depending upon their negotiating position.

Why the fuck would you hope to get lucky when you can get an upfront agreed amount in a hyper competitive environment and STILL sell for $5 for those not subscribed? It's ridiculous to think your game is gonna hit it off and sell tens of millions.

Negotiations are up to the devs/pubs and MS to agree upon. If you don't like the deal then you can walk away. It's business.

 

[davidjaffe]

then the game loses a significant amount of appeal with a much lower budget.

An thus, my point is proven. If you think the appeal of a video game is acquired by the budget, that is 100% fine and acceptable and worth being proud of (whatever- you know what I mean). TL;DR- you dig the stuff money can buy? Fantastic- lots of folks do.

And that may very well make you a lover of video games. And that's great too.

But INTERACTIVITY and expressing the views of the creators thru the medium itself is what makes special and those who appreciate and celebrate and champion that are the true hard core fans of the MEDIUM of games. That doesn't mean you are not Sony fan #1 or AAA fan #1 or big budget commercial fan #1. I HATED indie movies as a kid and all I loved was the big studio stuff. I was a massive movie fan. But I was NOT a cinephile.

One is not better than the other. But they are different things.

Unless you can argue how the AAA visuals themselves represent the creator taking advantage of those visuals in a way that expresses the essence of his vision in way otherwise not possible. To put it another way: DEATH OF A SALESMAN is still a classic, whether you perform it against a brick wall or film it as a 200 million dollar movie. Same with Hamilton. Same with HADES.

But if you remove the production value and performances of TLOU2, it would be a FANTASTIC game that is simply like lots of other games but just executed brilliantly. That's nothing to sneeze at but it would no longer be considered at the forefront of the medium.

 

[GuinGuin]

It's from Microsoft. Some people see it as their duty to bash anything from that camp.

But I agree. It's a fucking service. Noone gives a shit about Stadia, Geforce Now, PS Now and the other streaming services, but when the Microsoft brand is slapped on it... hoooo boy.

The only time people get bothered by it is when people start insisting every other brand go down that path like this video.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

It's from Microsoft. Some people see it as their duty to bash anything from that camp.

But I agree. It's a fucking service. Noone gives a shit about Stadia, Geforce Now, PS Now and the other streaming services, but when the Microsoft brand is slapped on it... hoooo boy.

Stadia is dead
Geforce Now is being pulled apart by third party pubs
PSNow is just there existing

Gamepass is the most prominent one that's always making headlines thanks to Microsoft aggressive investments

Of course it's become the primary subject when people discuss the future of subservices. Get over this victim complex

 

[Hobbygaming]

You think games won’t be sold anymore?

When less people are buying games because of all of these cheap services do you think developers will bother with big AAA SP games?

I'm not being harsh but the reality is that we're going to see a big dropoff in quality if gaming predominantly goes the streaming route

 

[GuinGuin]

Why the fuck would you hope to get lucky when you can get an upfront agreed amount in a hyper competitive environment and STILL sell for $5 for those not subscribed? It's ridiculous to think your game is gonna hit it off and sell tens of millions.

Negotiations are up to the devs/pubs and MS to agree upon. If you don't like the deal then you can walk away. It's business.

Because you might very well make more selling it to those people who are subbed than from whatever lump sum is being offered.

 

[skakmk]

Wholeheartedly agree about the budget/production part! I still dig games like half life, diablo 2 and silent hill 2 more than many of the recent games and I doubt this is because of high production values.

 

[megreotsugua]

Rocket League was offered day 1 on Playstation Plus.

I didn't realize that. I think Sony should embrace day 1 multiplayer games on PS Plus.

It's not better than the free-to-play monetization. But what I hope is that they find success in it that they wouldn't have to entertain the thought of copying gamepass model.

 

[grimrook]

gamepass is so overrated is funny

 

[Entroyp]

When less people are buying games because of all of these cheap services do you think developers will bother with big AAA SP games?

I'm not being harsh but the reality is that we're going to see a big dropoff in quality if gaming predominantly goes the streaming route

I totally agree with you and I’m hoping it doesn’t happen. Wishful thinking, I know.

 

[fart town usa]

It reminds me of how a certain subset of Apple fans told everyone iPad was the "future of computing" when it released, even though it obviously wasn't. And this insistence that if you didn't think so you were mired in the past or had a lack of vision. I would argue that seeing beyond hype and having a good intuition for what people actually want shows you actually have better vision than people who glom onto the most recent thing in an effort to look smart. Ten years later and the iPad is a pretty cool also-ran, just as expected at it's launch.

Bottom line, there is a certain subset of GP fans (not speaking about Jaffe here) who are shouting at every opportunity that it is the future, MS is around the corner from domination, and you better learn to love it or you're screwed. It's why a GP specific thread was created, because everything thread was being derailed into the arguments you see here, and it just goes in circles.

That makes sense, gamers boasting their "win" while other gamers feel threatened over their perceived long term ramifications, lol.

I often forget that fanboy wars still exist to an extent.

As for me, the best solution for gamepass is to

Spoiler: reasonable solution we can all agree on

buy a wii u

 

[grimrook]

Stadia is dead
Geforce Now is being pulled apart by third party pubs
PSNow is just there existing

Gamepass is the most prominent one that's always making headlines thanks to Microsoft aggressive investments

Of course it's become the primary subject when people discuss the future of subservices. Get over this victim complex

no gamepass is all over the place because ms spends far more on telling people there shit is great then on making great stuff so you see it everwhere

 

[mejin]

Netflix doesn’t have any great content, so he’s definitely wrong

he needs to step back and stop aggressively shilling sub services

they are OK for calling all cars tier content, they don’t really have a place for AAA unless publishers are willing to accept huge money hats or the service owner wants to lose tons of money

How dare you make sense?

 

[Bragr]

Yeah except you’re comparing something widely regarded as one of if not the worst games of all time to one widely regarded as one of the best. What a stupid comparison

This is exactly why it’s pointless. Also notice I listed Ozark, a series known to be of high quality to other series known to be of high quality. You act like I compared The Wire to The Ridiculous 6

Huh? but then you are arguing that quality matters, if all just subjective, then you should not be able to say Superman 64 is worse than any other game. If you do, you are arguing that quality matters.

 

[bender]

Jaffe's thumbnail text always cracks me up. Like clickbait headlines, you might be subscribed to Jaffe's channel. Watching his evolution as a content creator is like take a time warp to of 5-10 years ago.

 

[Miyazaki’s Slave]

From the perspective of working on GIGANTIC AAA games and games with a budget made of Ramen: access to players will always reign supreme.

You can get that player access several ways:
1) Your marketing budget is 35X the game budget (an actual figure). <-- Restrictive. The money controls the game.
2) Your game is easily accessible. <-- Can be restrictive, it all depends on how accessible you want it to be.

Mobile games (especially F2P games) have offered developers the largest "potential" player pool over the past several years. Steam and EGS are both doing that to some degree as well as they open their platform to streaming (via mobile).

Making money on mobile splits itself between CapTurns vs Margin engagement. (sometimes both...but not often).
CapTurns - or player turn over can be lucrative if you can attractive a constant base of new users that play your game and you monetize with ads.
Margin - You make a good game and you monetize it well. People like your game and they pay you money through IAP.

Subscription services largely focus on rewarding developers that have a "sticky" game ie they longer a player plays the more money the developer makes.
*(you also get players who will buy dlc or other micro transactions within the game they are playing on a sub service)

Very rare is the developer that is in the position to both make the game they want AND get access to a large pool of players WITHOUT giving away the farm to publishing partners.

IMO subscription services are a foot in the door for studios that do not have access/capital to play in the console space and want to get their content on as many devices/in front of as many players as possible.

 

[Bumblebeetuna]

Huh? but then you are arguing that quality matters, if all just subjective, then you should not be able to say Superman 64 is worse than any other game. If you do, you are arguing that quality matters.

totes, breh. Mentioning that some of the best stuff subscription has to offer can match up with some of the best stuff uh.. subscription cable has to offer, is exactly the same as Superman 64 vs Mario Galaxy

 

[Bryank75]

Stadia is dead
Geforce Now is being pulled apart by third party pubs
PSNow is just there existing

Gamepass is the most prominent one that's always making headlines thanks to Microsoft aggressive investments

Of course it's become the primary subject when people discuss the future of subservices. Get over this victim complex

Yeah most consumers don't want these services.... it's for the most part a corporate wet-dream, to rent games rather than sell them. For Customers to own nothing and have less rights.

That's why the corpo's are trying so damned hard. Even PSNow marketing is gone crazy right now.

 

[Loope]

you guys need to stop disrespecting this man... we may not always agree but the disrespect is unnecessary

That's why i say Sony fanboys are the worse. I mean, in this thread alone, we have plenty shitting on a person that fucking created one of the biggest, if not the biggest Sony franchise and all of a sudden, the older games are no longer good because the new one is the shit.

You can disagree with the man without being an asshole, you're on a videogame forum, you have a person here that created one of the biggest games ever (and i don't even liked the games) then your choice of words is to act like you know it all, a fucking forum dweller, more than a person that was plenty of time in the industry. This forum sometimes...

 

[Bragr]

totes, breh. Mentioning that some of the best stuff subscription has to offer can match up with some of the best stuff uh.. subscription cable has to offer, is exactly the same as Superman 64 vs Mario Galaxy

So bad vs good is objective, but when it's something you enjoy it becomes "all subjective"? I don't think you know what you are saying.

 

[Pejo]

• Subscription services like Netflix and Amazon Prime Video didn't affect the quality of movies and TV shows. If anything the quality got better based on the number of awards streaming services are winning (the Best Picture winner this year was on Hulu).

Lost me on the very first bullet point, OP.