• 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

Okay gentlemen, now is the time to get screenshots from all the old Gamepass-related threads. Should be interesting how people’s opinions magically change once it’s no longer something that one side has and the other doesn’t.
This is just a rebranding of PSNOW into PS+ with a huge influx of PS2+PS1 games. They still arent releasing AAA games day one.

Basically
PS+ (Currently PS+)
PS++ (PSNow+PS+)
PS+++ (PSNow with PS1&PS2 Classics+PS+)

They realize PS+ branding is stronger than PSNow. This is basically Nintendo Online Max.
 

kyliethicc

Member
We're going by monthly prices here though right? As it stands it's $10 for PS+ and $10 for PS Now

Who knows about 12-month prices. I don't even think MS lets you purchase GPU for 12 months still. Sony might follow suit with that too
Yeah I agree in the future Sony will just do monthly fees.

And yes GP is monthly only, I think.

But I was just saying technically right now people can get both services for effectively $10/month.
 

THE DUCK

voted poster of the decade by bots
Just like a lot of AAA games are not on steaming at first. Seems completely comparable to me.

No, it's not the same, it would only be the same if you had to go to a movie theater to play forza 5 for the first 3 months of its release.
 
Last edited:

onesvenus

Member
Are Sony games on Game Pass day 1? Are MS games on PSNow Day 1?

I never understood this argument when it comes to first party games, since they can only be played on said platforms regardless.
It's not really difficult. With Gamepass you don't need to buy Microsoft games.
With this service you'll need to buy Sony's games in addition to paying for the subscription
 

xrnzaaas

Member
Sony is not going to start giving away first party games on day 1 after they've raised the prices for the PS5 titles to 80€. Offering PS1-3 games would be cool, but not if it's going to be the most expensive option with PS Now for PS4 games which I wouldn't be interested in.
 

LiquidMetal14

hide your water-based mammals
Listen to me carefully here folks you sons of bitches, think about it if we have already years and years of PlayStation Plus in the year of our Lord already banked think if they actually convert those into this new gangster daddy PlayStation Plus let us pray
 
Yeah, I suppose, if you pay for a month at a time. If you pay for a yearly subscription (like I do), then PS Plus is $60/year, which comes out to $5/month. PS Now is also $60/year. Both together would be $120/year, which is $10/month.

Right, but this isn't factoring in discounted prices you'd get from 3 month, 6 month or yearly subs (assuming they actually do a yearly sub for it)

Yes, but PS Now already has streaming capability and PS3 games. Why should Sony remove those features from tier 2 and offer them only to tier 3? That would be worse than what already exists.

Besides, is there any good reason why Sony would think people would pay more for tier 3 just to get PS3 or PS2 games?

Like I said, I think Mr. Schreier must be wrong on some details here. Either that, or Sony is really bungling this up by making their subscription services noticeably worse.

The misconception here is people think tier 2 is PS Now. Tier 2 is PS+ and a catalogue of games that'll come and go.

Tier 3 is PS Now. This would be a price jump for cloud streaming, but remember the original price for PS Now was $20 a month. The only reason they cut it is because people weren't biting at that price.
 
Last edited:
Third party timed exclusivity has been a strategy for Sony and Microsoft for quite some time.
Yes but Sony's are clearly have a much higher profile

Deathloop
Ghostwire
Forsaken
FFVIIR
FFXVI
Kena: Bridge of Spirits
Knights of the Old Republic remake
Disco Elysium

Sony Spent $329 Million On Exclusive Third-Party PS5 Games For 2021

All I proposed is that Sony could continue this strategy and release third party titles Day One on a higher-tiered PSN+ by passing costs on to the consumer.
 

Topher

Gold Member
trying to figure out where pc/mobile users of ps now fit into this model

Same. I'm curious if this will be revealed along with more details on their plans on Azure.

No, it's not the same, it would only be the sane if you had to go to a movie theater to play forza 5 for the first 3 months of its release.

In either case, the movie or video game (for many AAA games) is not obtainable with the subscription service.
 
Last edited:

kyliethicc

Member
I could see Sony building streaming into their PlayStation app on iOS & Android.

Make it part of the highest tier. Letting people stream to phones seems inevitable.
 
Yes but Sony's are clearly have a much higher profile

Deathloop
Ghostwire
Forsaken
FFVIIR
FFXVI
Kena: Bridge of Spirits
Knights of the Old Republic remake
Disco Elysium

Sony Spent $329 Million On Exclusive Third-Party PS5 Games For 2021

All I proposed is that Sony could continue this strategy and release third party titles Day One on a higher-tiered PSN+ by passing costs on to the consumer.

That $329 million has nothing to do with third party games FYI
 

Hezekiah

Banned
Looks like Microsoft was ahead of the game when they launched Xbox Game Pass 4 years ago and now the rest of the industry is going to be playing catch-up. Will be hard to match the built-in advantage that Microsoft has with XCloud, PC, the most expansive BC library, and the deepest pockets in the world to snatch up brand new games and developers.
Sony aren't going to be putting their new games on a sub service day one, and throwing around loads of cheap deals for it.

I think anybody expecting that will be in for a shock.
 

Topher

Gold Member
All I proposed is that Sony could continue this strategy and release third party titles Day One on a higher-tiered PSN+ by passing costs on to the consumer.

Not going to engage in a list war. All costs are eventually passed on to the customer. That is how companies make profits.
 
Last edited:

Sanepar

Member
Same opinion I have about gamepass. Waste of money for 90% of the market

Majority of games market don't have time or want to play and finish 1 game per month.

U can buy any game besides Nintendo with 50-75% off in 6 months, sometimes less.
 
Last edited:

ultrazilla

Gold Member
While the "no 1st party games on the service" is a bit of a bummer, it doesn't technically stop big third party studios/publishers from possibly dropping their game on the service I presume?
Guess we would need to see the fine print/contract for that.

Still, a very welcome and over due move by Sony. I'm still rocking my Xbox One X(cause I can't find a Series X) and have the Ultimate Service as I mainly use it for PC. It's a great service and I'm
a bit surprised it took Sony this long to finally realize they'd better offer something similar to their fans. I do have a PS5 and will likely get the new service as long as prices are kept in the same
ballpark MS has "Ultimate".

Finally, one big "wild card" will be the Sony PC game releases. Will their service entitle you to those PC releases for free as part of the service? I almost feel they do in order to compete with MS.
 
Last edited:
I could see Sony building streaming into their PlayStation app on iOS & Android.

Make it part of the highest tier. Letting people stream to phones seems inevitable.

I thought we'd already have one tbh after they added the app to TVs. Guess Shawn and Co just didn't want to invest much into it while Jim is the opposite
 
Last edited:

Agent X

Member
The misconception here is people think tier 2 is PS Now. Tier 2 is PS+ and a catalogue of games that'll come and go.

Tier 3 is PS Now. This would be a price jump for cloud streaming, but remember the original price for PS Now was $20 a month.

I know it was $20/month at one time, but I don't know anyone personally who ever paid that. I've only paid by the year, and the most I've ever paid was $100/year.

The only reason they cut it is because people weren't biting at that price.

So, Sony believes that increasing the price and adding PS1/PSP games would convince millions upon millions of people to hop on board? I can't say that I agree with this.
 

Dream-Knife

Banned
It’s the latest game from Santa Monica, Polyphony and Insomniac’s flagship 2018 game.

Nintendo are selling straight up Wii ports like Skyward Sword for £40 and it’s sold 5 million copies.

Games like InFamous Second Son weren’t significantly discounted until the PS4 had been on the market for 2 years either. To compare that to what Nintendo do is laughable.
Give Sony time. You have to start somewhere. They aren't going to magically raise the price on older games.
 

bitbydeath

Member
Yes but Sony's are clearly have a much higher profile

Deathloop
Ghostwire
Forsaken
FFVIIR
FFXVI
Kena: Bridge of Spirits
Knights of the Old Republic remake
Disco Elysium

Sony Spent $329 Million On Exclusive Third-Party PS5 Games For 2021

All I proposed is that Sony could continue this strategy and release third party titles Day One on a higher-tiered PSN+ by passing costs on to the consumer.
The three Square games are PS console exclusive FYI. Unless you’re talking timed with PC?

Kena might also be PS console exclusive.
 
I know it was $20/month at one time, but I don't know anyone personally who ever paid that. I've only paid by the year, and the most I've ever paid was $100/year.



So, Sony believes that increasing the price and adding PS1/PSP games would convince millions upon millions of people to hop on board? I can't say that I agree with this.

No, they believe that getting rid of the PS Now baggage and attaching it to PS+ instead would make more people hop on board.
 

Banjo64

cumsessed
Give Sony time. You have to start somewhere. They aren't going to magically raise the price on older games.
No, they just won’t be able to charge £40 for Returnal in a sale in 2 years time because games like GTA 6 will be out and no one will give it a second glance at that price. People buy a Nintendo system to play Nintendo’s games. Sony are competing against Rockstar, EA, Ubisoft, Capcom, SEGA etc.
 

Dream-Knife

Banned
No, they just won’t be able to charge £40 for Returnal in a sale in 2 years time because games like GTA 6 will be out and no one will give it a second glance at that price. People buy a Nintendo system to play Nintendo’s games. Sony are competing against Rockstar, EA, Ubisoft, Capcom, SEGA etc.
I agree, but didn't Jim Ryan say something recently about envying Nintendo's model or something to that effect?
 

Topher

Gold Member
Such a service is not sustainable!

Neither is that joke

whoopi goldberg shrug GIF by The Late Show With Stephen Colbert
 

Hezekiah

Banned
So basically what he initially said is not true. It's an upgrade to PS+

I can't imagine Sony coming up with a GP competitor. What is the motivation or business goal? Makes absolutely no sense for them.
Agreed. Sony as a whole have set aside billions for acquisitions.

I really don't think they also plan to set up what would be a significant money sink over the next few years for a service like GamePass.
 

kyliethicc

Member
Just an fyi, this was a comparison of PS Now and Game Pass libraries from earlier this year.

Obviously the exact number of games changes over time.

But the point is Sony has room to add hundreds of PS1, PS2, and PSP games to the service. With 400+ PS3 games already. That's enough for its own separate tier.

And with 400+ PS4 games already there, they can soon get to a point where they would have a library of over 500 PS4 & PS5 games.

RcJKIlU.jpg
 

DJTaurus

Member
Personally i truly support what Jim is trying to do with his more open approach to PlayStation brand. Gamepass is sustainable so he just follows the flow…. he believes in cross gen games. He will continue giving his top tier triple games to PC gamers and embrace subscription services even more. He is not a dinosaur living and stuck in the past…. he is moving the brand forward like no other. :)
 
Last edited:

Banjo64

cumsessed
Just an fyi, this was a comparison of PS Now and Game Pass libraries from earlier this year.

Obviously the exact number of games changes over time.

But the point is Sony has room to add hundreds of PS1, PS2, and PSP games to the service. With 400+ PS3 games already. That's enough for its own separate tier.

And with 400+ PS4 games already there, they can soon get to a point where they would have a library of over 500 PS4 & PS5 games.

RcJKIlU.jpg
For once it’s quality over quantity in Xbox’s favour.
 

T-Cake

Member
Just an fyi, this was a comparison of PS Now and Game Pass libraries from earlier this year.

Obviously the exact number of games changes over time.

But the point is Sony has room to add hundreds of PS1, PS2, and PSP games to the service. With 400+ PS3 games already. That's enough for its own separate tier.

And with 400+ PS4 games already there, they can soon get to a point where they would have a library of over 500 PS4 & PS5 games.

RcJKIlU.jpg

Well I'm going to spend the rest of my evening doing some calculations because I honestly don't think there's anyway near 860 games on PlayStation Now. My guess is max 200 for PS3/4 each.
 

kyliethicc

Member
For once it’s quality over quantity in Xbox’s favour.
With retro games perhaps. Given Xbox's boosting of 360 games.

But everyone knows the PS4 has a higher quality library than the Xbox One.

Well I'm going to spend the rest of my evening doing some calculations because I honestly don't think there's anyway near 860 games on PlayStation Now. My guess is max 200 for PS3/4 each.
 
Last edited:

DForce

NaughtyDog Defense Force
If its 19.99 for the top tier subscription then that would be a dumb move. It should be nore more than $14.99 and they should offer you the opportunity to download the PS1-PS2 classics.
 
IT'S HAPPENING!!!

Gonna be really interesting to see their take on the streaming model. Going by the info rumored, sounds like they're doing what they should've done i.e merging some of their other things like PS Now and PS+. I imagine at least one of the tiers will include Crunchyroll/Funimation content and Sony Pictures legacy film/tv shows too (I mean they do have a channel for that on TV, technically speaking).

But I'm most interested in, is it going to include new 1P releases Day 1? I put a thought out a while back that it could theoretically, while still working with their business model, if they offered subscriptions to specific releases on a contract-like monthly plan. So you get Game A for example as a Day 1 release into the service but instead of paying $70 outright you pay $5/mo. Since its contractual you're still bound to pay off the contract so essentially it can count as a sale, at least with my limited knowledge on the business side of these things.

It'd be easy enough to throw that in as part of the tiers; davidjaffe davidjaffe I know has also said for a while that Sony could use the service as a way of providing new releases of smaller games maybe not fit for retail but add value to the platform. Like a new Parappa, for example. They could scale that among the different tiers.

Honestly I thought this big renovation of theirs would be a few years later but I guess plans are accelerating. Also has me curious how Microsoft competes with them in terms of inevitable film/television/music etc. media content as value-adds because they don't produce any of their own stuff in those media like Sony does (who apparently also has the Netflix deal they can leverage, too).
 

Dr Bass

Member
Personally i truly support what Jim is trying to do with his more open approach to PlayStation brand. Gamepass is sustainable so he just follows the flow…. he believes in cross gen games. He will continue giving his top tier triple games to PC gamers and embrace subscription services even more. He is not a dinosaur living and stuck in the past…. he is moving the brand forward like no other. :)
In response to your bolded, and aside from the fact your avatar features my favorite tennis player of all time, ...

Not all change is good. This idea that sub services are the "future" and "selling products" makes you a dinosaur is just false. Having high revenues that sustain expensive development efforts hardly makes you a "dinosaur." It means you have a good business.

Again, this goes to what I was saying at an earlier post. There is nothing, absolutely nothing, that supports the idea that Game Pass is a good business move. Now I have changed my mind in some ways as I think MS is going to be fine with it, but it's because they are going to subsidize it with both 3rd party game sales fees and large F2P MTX efforts. And perhaps money from other sources in the company.

Again, so many people here talk about the "23 studios" MS has, but completely ignore the fact MS now has to pay salaries and studios costs to support all 23 while not really charging for their games. The hope is that a smallish sub service is going to fund this? Sony is NOT going to go in this direction when they are comfortably winning.

Sony and Nintendo are making record profits right now.

Microsoft won't even say what their broken down revenue is.
 

sainraja

Member
It was only a matter of time. They should have just re-launched PlayStation Now but since they are combining services I guess this makes some sense.
It's not a competing service if first party games aren't included day 1.
It doesn't need to be a 1:1 service to be a competing service and Sony already had a competing service (people often forget) to Game Pass and PlayStation Now was it; they just weren't pushing it as heavily as MS was pushing Game Pass.

We'll need to learn more about Sony's plans on how games will rotate in/out. When GS launched, I thought it was 100 games in/100 games out but it wasn't set up like that. Games do come and go every month but there is no consistency as far as I can tell on how many come and go (I haven't really been tracking, since services like GS allow me to try games I otherwise wouldn't, the ones I want, I always purchase.)
 
Last edited:

DaGwaphics

Member
Just an fyi, this was a comparison of PS Now and Game Pass libraries from earlier this year.

Obviously the exact number of games changes over time.

But the point is Sony has room to add hundreds of PS1, PS2, and PSP games to the service. With 400+ PS3 games already. That's enough for its own separate tier.

And with 400+ PS4 games already there, they can soon get to a point where they would have a library of over 500 PS4 & PS5 games.

RcJKIlU.jpg

The biggest issue for me with PS Now is that there isn't enough transition of titles, though they have been working on that over the last year or two. A stagnant library is less interesting regardless of how big it is. GP has good selection of titles with some that stick (the first party and EA) and plenty that come and go so that there is always something to look at.
 

Loxus

Member
Well I'm going to spend the rest of my evening doing some calculations because I honestly don't think there's anyway near 860 games on PlayStation Now. My guess is max 200 for PS3/4 each.
PlayStation Now Wiki
As of 2020, there are over 800 games available, with over 300 of them available for download to PlayStation 4 and PlayStation 5.
 

Brigandier

Member
Sony has sure been following MS' trends lately. People criticized MS for putting games on PC, then sony does the same. Then Sony tries to avoid Cross-Play, but then does the same. Then people say GamePass isn't profitable/sustainable, then sony does the same thing lol.

Looks like MS' approach was right. Soon exclusives will matter less and less too.

The only people that criticise a platforms games being available on other platforms like PC are rabid fanboys.

The only people that don't want Sony to have a gamepass like service are fanboys who are incredibly worried about their beloved corporation losing money which I find hilarious I might add, They also don't like value for their money 🤷‍♂️

Me personally I'm all for a monthly fee Sony service if it's good value.
 
As an xbox owner, gamepass has been awesome. If Sony can put early access to titles AND get ps1,2,3 games, that is great! I'll have to pick up a ps5
 

DaGwaphics

Member
Again, so many people here talk about the "23 studios" MS has, but completely ignore the fact MS now has to pay salaries and studios costs to support all 23 while not really charging for their games. The hope is that a smallish sub service is going to fund this? Sony is NOT going to go in this direction when they are comfortably winning.

GP isn't free. Wouldn't surprise me in the least if GP already brings in enough revenue in base subscriptions alone to completely cover the costs of running all of the studios. Plus they are still selling a lot of software, MGS titles do quite well on Steam and there are still plenty of Xbox users without GP.
 
Top Bottom