• 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.

Jim Ryan says Sony’s games ‘could suffer’ by adding them to PlayStation Plus on day one (VCG)

MScarpa

Member
What are you talking about from nowhere? Did you smoke something?

Thanks I have fun and enjoy my games.
If you can't comprehend what my last post was about, I can't help you much. Maybe English isn't your first language. Here I'll say it again, Try and enjoy games from all platforms, all genres. There are many great games on all the systems. There are a handful of us that aren't crazy biased warriors like yourself. But hey if you want to send me your PSN name, I'll add you, because, see, I play on all platforms. 😘
 

ethomaz

Banned
If you can't comprehend what my last post was about, I can't help you much. Maybe English isn't your first language. Here I'll say it again, Try and enjoy games from all platforms, all genres. There are many great games on all the systems. There are a handful of us that aren't crazy biased warriors like yourself. But hey if you want to send me your PSN name, I'll add you, because, see, I play on all platforms. 😘
If you can’t comprehend what I said maybe English is not your first language (I was curious about that since you said that I wrote MTX is a good thing lol).
But I will explain to you… I have fun and enjoy games on PlayStation… I don’t need or desire another platform.
I have no issue in having a bias.

My PSN is my username… never crossed your mind some people doesn’t use alts?
 
Last edited:

MScarpa

Member
If you can’t comprehend what I said maybe English is not your first language (I curious about that since you said that I write MTX is a good thing lol).
But I will explain to you… I have fun and enjoy games on PlayStation… I don’t need or deride another platform.
I have no issue in having a bias.

My PSN is my username… never passed over your mind some people doesn’t use alts.
Ok Edmarcio, whatever you say. 😘
 

Agent X

Member
Why is it all or nothing? Smaller games can and should be Day one

I disagree, putting games on a service day one devalues games imo

I've got to agree with 93xfan 93xfan on this one. I can envision Sony launching certain low to mid-tier games on the service. I wouldn't necessarily say that all of them should be PS Plus games, but they should dabble with the concept.

One idea that hasn't been explored much for these game subscription services is the concept of episodic games. I remember that Telltale Games' Sam & Max Season 1 debuted on GameTap about 15 years ago. Imagine if Sony struck a deal with the revived Telltale to release each episode of The Wolf Among Us 2 immediately at launch.

Sony could produce new episodic games in existing first-party franchises. I'd like to see a Sly Cooper episodic game, which would make sense as the earlier games had a presentation that resembled a series of episodes. How about a new Uncharted episodic game? Or, get Quantic Dream to produce an episodic adventure, which was something they had considered doing with Heavy Rain.

Subscription services are ideal for this format. Players that enjoy the games will get hooked, and want to keep their subscriptions going so they can see what will come next.
 

TheTony316

Member
I don't see it. We've seen with Game Pass that games aren't suffering. How do budgets for Sony games compare to Microsoft? I would assume for the AAA stuff it's very similar.
Budgets might be more or less the same but Sony isn't Microsoft. They don't have infinite money to burn on a service.
 

Hobbygaming

has been asked to post in 'Grounded' mode.
I've got to agree with 93xfan 93xfan on this one. I can envision Sony launching certain low to mid-tier games on the service. I wouldn't necessarily say that all of them should be PS Plus games, but they should dabble with the concept.

One idea that hasn't been explored much for these game subscription services is the concept of episodic games. I remember that Telltale Games' Sam & Max Season 1 debuted on GameTap about 15 years ago. Imagine if Sony struck a deal with the revived Telltale to release each episode of The Wolf Among Us 2 immediately at launch.

Sony could produce new episodic games in existing first-party franchises. I'd like to see a Sly Cooper episodic game, which would make sense as the earlier games had a presentation that resembled a series of episodes. How about a new Uncharted episodic game? Or, get Quantic Dream to produce an episodic adventure, which was something they had considered doing with Heavy Rain.

Subscription services are ideal for this format. Players that enjoy the games will get hooked, and want to keep their subscriptions going so they can see what will come next.
Episodic games gets a big no from me 🤮 I'd rather have the full game and I'll buy it if it's good and if I'm interested in it
 

Robb

Gold Member
I get the reasoning but I think they’ll have a difficult time competing with GamePass, if that’s their plan.

The first party games being on GamePass day one is the only thing keeping me subscribed. If they leave I’d leave with them.
 

Zeroing

Banned
What your idea of quality games?
You keep bringing that nonstop. Doesnt MS make quality games too?
Not saying they do not, what I am saying is if they get comfortable there is not need for them to push for new IPs etc. As you can see by current landscape of gaming, annually copy-paste games are not what I would define by quality.

No one denies that. Its why they are fixing that now.
See, maybe it is me who been on Design and value creativity and push of new ideas but these aquisitions by MS reminds me of University where we had a 1 month to make a project and I had 1 colleague that spent all that month doing nothing then he bough a template on the internet and made the project in 1 day... smart, unfair and he learned nothing...
If MS wanted to fix things they should had done it earlier, maybe Phill should not had closed all those studios, they clearly had the money to keep them.


What promises? People know games take too long to make. That is nothing, compared to spending alot of money, just to support a company.

There is different between waiting for a game, and Paying $60 for a remastered game, that is barely a remaster.
Do not make me go back to Phil's best of list of broken dreams and promises/wait for e3.
There is a difference between Nintendo who only relies on gaming and MS who can dump lots of cash on things. Some people see the contrast between those 2 companies - Nintendo and their passion for gaming and like support good games/Devs. It is their money.


Have you seen the state of the gaming industry right now?
How is it ok to pay $70 for broken ass game, when the devs rely on day1 patches to fix the goddamn game.

People are just tired of the narratives that games are great, if you pay the price. end of 2020- 2022 games have been shit so far, when they launched due to bugs. That is the concern you need to make first.
The industry is so greedy that it cannot make new IPs without being certain the game will be a huge financial success. That is what I value, new iPs, new experiences, being brave. From all of the industry the only ones doing it are the indies studios and Playstation. I choose to support those.
Yes the gaming industry keeps getting worse and worse and surely it is not gamepass that will make things better.


 
I actually agree with Jim Ryan here.

Is there a correlation between budget and quality of a game beyond a certain point.

I feel just enough budget should be given. Else it results in bloat and unnecessary focus on stuff not needed.

Best Sony games are low budget titles relatively, Shadow of the Colossus (PS2), Demon's Souls (PS3), Returnal etc.

Higher budget could be helpful with Naughty Dog games for improving MO Cap/ animations or Santa Monica's new God of War.

Every other studio of theirs wastes extra budget in excessive cut scenes or mo cap or unnecessary bloat and systems. They would be much better games if they were more focused.
 
If Sony think that having first-party games release Day One on PS+ Extra is damaging then it makes me wonder just how much money Microsoft make with GamePass since it is a model that they claim works very well for them. However, Sony seem to be inferring that the subscription model is less profitable.

Personally though, I've always wondered how Microsoft make money from GamePass because there's X number of games and X number of subscribers so it is an equal cut goes to each publisher of the game on the service or it is based on what people actually download and play (so do some games suffer because fewer people play them or not even play them at all)? Obviously, the more subscribers you have then more money you make on the games available on the service but while it might be a great service for smaller indie games that perhaps don't sell in huge numbers, it surely cannot be profitable for the larger more expensive triple-A games that typically have to sell tens of millions of units to make money? Of course, Microsoft currently don't make that many of these types of games so that is why GamePass likely works well for them at the moment.
 

Leyasu

Banned
This is a perfect example of what some of you dont get. The studios owned by Sony (or Ms I suppose) doesnt run solely on money coming from Sony. They are still businesses in their own right that has to make ends meet internally and invest in the future according to their visions with the money they make from their games, so when naughty dog sells 20+ million copies of whatever its not only good for them because it satisfies sony, but because they can expand and develop as a studio with mean dough.

The thing about being part of a subscription based business model is that, as a game studio, you are basically being tasked with creating the next mega blockbuster just to make ends meet.
michael jordan laughing GIF



Lol you have got it all arse about face backwards. It is the opposite. Each studios next game could well be make or break. Whereas if they are getting money during development from subscribers it alleviates a lot of the risks.

What do Sony fanboys think that they are going to be using this revenue for?
 
Last edited:

reksveks

Member
If Sony think that having first-party games release Day One on PS+ Extra is damaging then it makes me wonder just how much money Microsoft make with GamePass since it is a model that they claim works very well for them. However, Sony seem to be inferring that the subscription model is less profitable.

You need to account for:
- new users to the platform due to gamepass and their non-GP spending
- the change in current xbox users whom have now got GP

If a user joined the xbox platform cause of GP then the additional non-GP revenue they spend is additional revenue that xbox is getting. The issue could be that Sony believes that the user acquisition from a GP alternative doesn't make sense for them at the moment especially whilst they are being supplied constrained to a greater extent.

Personally though, I've always wondered how Microsoft make money from GamePass because there's X number of games and X number of subscribers so it is an equal cut goes to each publisher of the game on the service or it is based on what people actually download and play (so do some games suffer because fewer people play them or not even play them at all)? Obviously, the more subscribers you have then more money you make on the games available on the service but while it might be a great service for smaller indie games that perhaps don't sell in huge numbers, it surely cannot be profitable for the larger more expensive triple-A games that typically have to sell tens of millions of units to make money? Of course, Microsoft currently don't make that many of these types of games so that is why GamePass likely works well for them at the moment.

The deals are custom to each game, and it's not related to the % time spent relative to the whole library of gamepass. It might be related to the time spent or downloads but it's all very custom as far as we know.
 

reksveks

Member
What do Sony fanboys think that they are going to be using this revenue for?
The optimistic take that Sony ain't going to be using this to improve their margins is a bit weird. They might reinvest the money but might not.
 
Last edited:

Leyasu

Banned
The optimistic take that Sony ain't going to be using this to improve their margins is a bit weird. They might reinvest the moment but might not.
Jim has gotten a lot of flak the last couple of years but it is clear that the guy is no fool. They will have some running costs for the service, but to think that this revenue will not find it's way into their 1st party studios and wont help with their running costs is some naivety on the same level as a 6yr old little girls.
 
Last edited:

reksveks

Member
Jim has gotten a lot of flak the last couple of years but it is clear that the guy is no fool. They will have some running costs for the service, but to think that this revenue will not find it's way into their 1st party studios and wont help with their running costs is some naivety on the same level as a 6yr old little girls.
I just had a twitter thread where someone thought that Sony was investing 5bn a year into playstation R&D (actually it was 1.2bn for the last financial year reported)
. They were arguing that's why Nintendo was so much more profitable (invested about 880m).

It was rather weird.
 

Helghan

Member
Classic Jim Ryan, giving excuses to get as much money out of their users as possible, while simultaneously taking a jab at Microsoft.
 

T0minator

Member
It makes perfect sense.

It's Flexibility piece that Sony is 100% aware of. They know most ppl will get the Essential then go up or down tiers in and out of months. Hoping ppl stay in Extra/Premium.

Sony spending money to keep consistent content from 3rd Parties is the goal, to generate more subs through consistent content.

Selling the games separate will support that services business model better. It's a cycle of both models feeding money to each other. To get better and better
 

mxbison

Member
Just PR speak for we want your $70 still

If they want $70 instead of season passes and mtx, that's fine with me.

Huge budget singleplayer games like Uncharted, God of War, The Last of Us, released on a subscription service day 1 just doesn't seem like a good investment. Maybe for some customer acquisition but not in the long run.
 

Shmunter

Member
If those total games can manage to sell 50m copies at the price of $60.

That is what you get from gamepass at 25m per year.

Every game won't necessarily net you an exponential amount of new subscribers, but then again it's not like any game is tied to a service either, games on either Sony pass or Xbox pass will still have the option to sell at retail. Neither avenue is permanently closed to them.

If Sony Pass gets 20m paying subscribers on board let's say, those subscribers are still continuing to pay the months or years it can take between marquee first party games. That's not just one $60 every two years, that's a continuous stream of $10 to $18 every month between releases. Not to mention the MTX content associated with the game, we've seen more than 1 big analyst reports in the last couple of days that show how folks on subscription services can tend to pay more frequently for additional content. I'm sure Sony sees that and wants a piece of the action too.

i-e I don't think there'll be any issue of a monetary shortfall.
Yes it has to be offset against the retail sales loss vs people sitting pretty on sony/gamepass through the year. But conversely also keeping in mind the subscription service sustenance beyond the individual game - payments need to be made to 3rd parties for their content - see e.g. the Guardians Of The galaxy costs to have it on gamepass early on.

The individual sale of a game is self contained as it's own entity. Ryan's done the numbers obviously otherwise we would get brand new 1st party on the Sonypass, it's not based on wet finger up into the air methodology obviously.
 
Last edited:

Haggard

Banned
That was to be expected.
Why throw away those juicy revenue peaks in hope to lure people into a subscription they can just cancel after they`ve beaten the game.
MS can eat those "sustainable" losses until hell freezes over without any repercussions, Sony would probably have to adapt their development budgets if they just put everything into their subscription service...which nobody would be happy with.
 
Last edited:

kingfey

Banned
The industry is so greedy that it cannot make new IPs without being certain the game will be a huge financial success. That is what I value, new iPs, new experiences, being brave. From all of the industry the only ones doing it are the indies studios and Playstation. I choose to support those.
Yes the gaming industry keeps getting worse and worse and surely it is not gamepass that will make things better.
I would consider Sony to be brave, if they can manage to make different type of games.
So far, Sony has worked on safe formula.
While MS despite people shitting on them, worked on broad range of games.
We have yet to see a shooter game, from Sony this generation, after kill zone.

It seems Sony is focus right now, is games You specifically want.

I have yet to see a game like the witcher 3, red dead redemption, skyrim type of games, without post apocalypse.
 

kingfey

Banned
Yes it has to be offset against the retail sales loss vs people sitting pretty on sony/gamepass through the year. But conversely also keeping in mind the subscription service sustenance beyond the individual game - payments need to be made to 3rd parties for their content - see e.g. the Guardians Of The galaxy costs to have it on gamepass early on.

The individual sale of a game is self contained as it's own entity. Ryan's done the numbers obviously otherwise we would get brand new 1st party on the Sonypass, it's not based on wet finger up into the air methodology obviously.
Selling those games on the service, will also offset some of the cost. You also have the option to sell the games, besides the service.

You can have both worlds.
 

JLB

Banned
What a sad hyperbole take. GP has mostly shovelware and cheap indies and their first party lacks any real good games apart from Forza. See? I know how to be hyperbolic too.
The only difference this service has from GP is day one first party but, unlike MS’s games, Sony games sell and don’t need to rely on a subscription service. Joke is on you.

To have all first party games day one, or not, makes all the difference. It would have been by far the biggest news of gaming of the year.
Btw, that dumb idea that “ms needs a sub to sell games” is idiotic. Check the numbers of sold copies of games like FH5 or Halo or SoT, all day one games on GP.
 

The_Mike

I cry about SonyGaf from my chair in Redmond, WA
not hard to understand, its why disney isn’t putting Dr Strange and The Multiverse of Madness on Disney + day 1
If you have the Disney plus prime sub you can watch them day one.

Theyve done that with other movies so wouldn't surprise me with that as well.
 

sol_bad

Member
Haven't the majority of Microsoft games been open world and MTX based with very little effort in story telling?

Crackdown 3
Bleeding Edge
Forza Horizon 4/5
Sea of Thieves
State of Decay 2/3
Grounded

Then you have the indie darling of the Ori games.

And then Halo Infinite is relying on multiplayer? Was it's single player good and was the investment of it's story on the same level as Sony's AAA titles?

Sony's single player games are on an entirely different level compared to Microsoft. This is not deniable. From the gameplay, to the music, the the graphics quality, to the animation. There is nothing like Uncharted, TLOU or God of war from Microsoft Studios. Not even from the studios they recently purchased.
And look at the quality difference between Ratchet and Clank and Psychonauts 2. I know Double Fine is a smaller studio but this is who Microsoft bought to make games for them.
Not a knock on Double Fine though because I love their games and own them all except Psychonauts 2, just haven't got around to purchasing it yet. They are still a talented studio but not on the same level as Insomniac.
 

Haggard

Banned
Selling those games on the service, will also offset some of the cost. You also have the option to sell the games, besides the service.

You can have both worlds.
Just how dumb do you think the average consumer is?
You can have both worlds....on paper. In reality the more expensive offer will suffer drastically and you will make much less money per product than you used to.
Subsrcription services are a risky bet that need massive amounts of money upfront to maybe reach a permanent userbase big enough to actually make profit some time in the future.
You need to have deep pockets or a lot of investors willing to lend you theirs to pull something like this.
And it is in no way safe to say that "all inclusive" subsription services themselves can be profitable at all in the gaming space, yet.
It is understandable that Sony isn`t willing to take too much of a risk here.
 
Last edited:

Stuart360

Member
Netflix films vs. Theater bangers.

Not only in special effects department, but editing, scripts, etc..

And this,
Deep i think you need to do a bit of Googling. Netflix tv shows have some of the biggest budgets in the busines, and film wise they dropped a couple of 100mil budget films the past few months, with almost zero marketing.

People can argue the quality of Netflix tv and films all they want, but its nothing to do with the budgets of those TV and films.
 

Kokoloko85

Member
Why do people act like netflix releases day 1 cinema blockblusters? They dont.

Imagine if Disney just went straight to day1 on disney+ instead of the movies coming out on cinema first? They dont because its not sustainable.

Just because Ms can bleed money doesnt mean its sustainable in the industry.

Netflix hasnt replaced cinema or movie studios. It replaced blockbluster, get over it
 

JLB

Banned
Haven't the majority of Microsoft games been open world and MTX based with very little effort in story telling?

Crackdown 3
Bleeding Edge
Forza Horizon 4/5
Sea of Thieves
State of Decay 2/3
Grounded

Then you have the indie darling of the Ori games.

And then Halo Infinite is relying on multiplayer? Was it's single player good and was the investment of it's story on the same level as Sony's AAA titles?

Sony's single player games are on an entirely different level compared to Microsoft. This is not deniable. From the gameplay, to the music, the the graphics quality, to the animation. There is nothing like Uncharted, TLOU or God of war from Microsoft Studios. Not even from the studios they recently purchased.
And look at the quality difference between Ratchet and Clank and Psychonauts 2. I know Double Fine is a smaller studio but this is who Microsoft bought to make games for them.
Not a knock on Double Fine though because I love their games and own them all except Psychonauts 2, just haven't got around to purchasing it yet. They are still a talented studio but not on the same level as Insomniac.

On storytelling and based on quantity, I agree.
But for now. Once The Elder Scrolls VI, Starfield, Avowed, Fables, etc. joined the already great games with awesome stories like Halo, Wasteland, Psychonauts 2 the reality will be different.
 

Bo_Hazem

Banned

PlayStation CEO Jim Ryan has said in a new interview that Sony‘s games “could suffer” if they were added to PlayStation Plus on day one.

Ryan’s comments appeared in a new interview with GamesIndustry.biz, which was published alongside news of PlayStation’s redesigned PS Plus.

When asked about adding new Sony first-party titles to the service in the game was that Microsoft does with its Xbox Game Pass, Ryan said: “This is not a road that we’ve gone down in the past. And it’s not a road that we’re going to go down with this new service.”

“We feel if we were to do that with the games that we make at PlayStation Studios, that virtuous cycle will be broken. The level of investment that we need to make in our studios would not be possible, and we think the knock-on effect on the quality of the games that we make would not be something that gamers want.”

Ryan also spoke about the changing environment that video games and Sony find themselves in. “Who would have said even four years ago that you would see AAA PlayStation IP being published on PC?” he asked, referring to the PC ports of Horizon Zero Dawn and God of War.

“[We’ve had] great critical success and great commercial success, and everybody has made their peace with that happening and is completely at ease with it,” he claimed. “I look back four years and think nobody would have seen that coming.”

Ryan was also keen to point out that nothing about the new service is set in stone. “All I’m talking to today is the approach we’re taking in the short term. The way our publishing model works right now, it doesn’t make any sense. But things can change very quickly in this industry, as we all know.”

Sony has officially announced its new three-tier subscription service, which will use the PlayStation Plus brand.

As previously reported, the service will combine two of Sony’s existing subscription offerings, PlayStation Plus and PlayStation Now, and phase out the branding of the latter.

iggy azalea s GIF
 

JLB

Banned
Why do people act like netflix releases day 1 cinema blockblusters? They dont.

Imagine if Disney just went straight to day1 on disney+ instead of the movies coming out on cinema first? They dont because its not sustainable.

Just because Ms can bleed money doesnt mean its sustainable in the industry.

Netflix hasnt replaced cinema or movie studios. It replaced blockbluster, get over it

Thats exactly where Disney+ is going. Its ridiculous to think that Disney is going to lose subs to sell cinema tickets. What is this, 2008 again?
BTW, What the fuck is The Irishman? a series B film? Jesus.
 
Last edited:

RoboFu

One of the green rats
Why do people act like netflix releases day 1 cinema blockblusters? They dont.

Imagine if Disney just went straight to day1 on disney+ instead of the movies coming out on cinema first? They dont because its not sustainable.

Just because Ms can bleed money doesnt mean its sustainable in the industry.

Netflix hasnt replaced cinema or movie studios. It replaced blockbluster, get over it
Disney does do that with alot of their releases and want to do all their movies but can’t because of contracts with various companies and actors. They make way more money off Disney + subs.

It’s actually exactly like the MS situation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JLB

Chronicle

Member
Why are people in here crying for day one first party blockbuster games? Use your brains. It'd not feasible and not going to happen. Over on the other team what big first party blockbuster games have been released? Halo and forza? Going forward that's going to change. its just not sustainable.

It blows my mind how people on here just go on these delusional thought rampages bending reality to suit there own desires. And when they don't come to fruition they whine, cry and complain as if something was stolen from them. You violate yourselves. Stop with the wishful thinking and think things through.
 

JLB

Banned
Why are people in here crying for day one first party blockbuster games? Use your brains. It'd not feasible and not going to happen. Over on the other team what big first party blockbuster games have been released? Halo and forza? Going forward that's going to change. its just not sustainable.

It blows my mind how people on here just go on these delusional thought rampages bending reality to suit there own desires. And when they don't come to fruition they whine, cry and complain as if something was stolen from them. You violate yourselves. Stop with the wishful thinking and think things through.

So its not feasible to happen something that is already happening for quite a long time (2018). Good rationale here.
If this is (or is not) sustainable in the long term is a matter to analyze then, in the long term. For now seems to work very well.
 

Chronicle

Member
So its not feasible to happen something that is already happening for quite a long time (2018). Good rationale here.
If this is (or is not) sustainable in the long term is a matter to analyze then, in the long term. For now seems to work very well.
What happened?
 

Helghan

Member
Why are people in here crying for day one first party blockbuster games? Use your brains. It's not feasible and not going to happen. Over on the other team what big first party blockbuster games have been released? Halo and forza? Going forward that's going to change. its just not sustainable.

It blows my mind how people on here just go on these delusional thought rampages bending reality to suit there own desires. And when they don't come to fruition they whine, cry and complain as if something was stolen from them. You violate yourselves. Stop with the wishful thinking and think things through.
Could you explain in detail why it isn't feasible and not going to happen? Do you think the development cost of games for Sony is much higher than the development cost of Xbox Game Studios? Starfield alone was probably more expensive than any Uncharted game. So if Microsoft believes the business model works when they release games like that on Game Pass, then why wouldn't it be sustainable for Sony to do the same?
 

JLB

Banned
What happened?

A subscription releasing outstanding games, since 2018. Supposedly that its not feasible.
Unless you actually believe that the only AAA games on GP are Halo and Forza. If thats the case then you dont know what is GP at all.
 
Last edited:

MonarchJT

Banned
Just PR speak for we want your $70 still
this
The thing is ...the type of investment Sony and Ms are doing for their games is pretty much the same .. some games are big budget some are not. The real difference here is that Sony can't afford the initial losses from launching a true gamepass rival service. Because it is obvious that the initial investment (and which will last for several years) is enormous.
The story of the "premium games" production difference is just blatant pr
 
Last edited:

Kokoloko85

Member
Thats exactly where Disney+ is going. Its ridiculous to think that Disney is going to lose subs to sell cinema tickets. What is this, 2008 again?
BTW, What the fuck is The Irishman? a series B film? Jesus.

Have Disney gone there yet though? Have they released any Marvel or Star Wars movie day 1 on their service. Nooooo
Its ridiculous to think Disney is gonna give up making billions a weekend release of a movie…. When they are making plenty from the sub service separately.

So neither Netflix, Disney+ or Amazon are releasing Cinema movies day 1 on their service lol. So we in the year 2022 buddy and your vision from 2008 hasnt happened yet?

I loved it when Netflix Released The Batman day 1 on Netflix, Oh and dont forget when Amazon Prime released Dune on day 1…… Not happening

Irishman, yeah name me 20 more movies that are at that quality

Netflix beat Blockbuster, rental movies, not the movie and tv industry
 

JLB

Banned
Have Disney gone there yet though? Have they released any Marvel or Star Wars movie day 1 on their service. Nooooo
Its ridiculous to think Disney is gonna give up making billions a weekend release of a movie…. When they are making plenty from the sub service separately.

So neither Netflix, Disney+ or Amazon are releasing Cinema movies day 1 on their service lol. So we in the year 2022 buddy and your vision from 2008 hasnt happened yet?

I loved it when Netflix Released The Batman day 1 on Netflix, Oh and dont forget when Amazon Prime released Dune on day 1…… Not happening

Irishman, yeah name me 20 more movies that are at that quality

Netflix beat Blockbuster, rental movies, not the movie and tv industry

The Irishman is a nearly 250 million dollars production.

Irishman, yeah name me 20 more movies that are at that quality.

As I said many times, I dont google for others for free. You can do it and get your answer.

Netflix beat Blockbuster, rental movies, not the movie and tv industry
Netflix IS becoming the movie and tv industry, thats the part you are still not getting. Once you get that probably you will get also why MS is acquiring so many gaming companies as well.
 
Last edited:

Kokoloko85

Member
Disney does do that with alot of their releases and want to do all their movies but can’t because of contracts with various companies and actors. They make way more money off Disney + subs.

It’s actually exactly like the MS situation.

Disney hasnt released one Marvel or Star Wars movie apart from Black Widow and that was because of Covid. Where they charged a PPV.

There not giving up on billions in a weekend from their major films. That can coexist with the sub service and perfect to come to the sub service after a few months.
 
Top Bottom