• 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.

All-new PlayStation Plus launches in June with three flexible membership options

DJ12

Member
>still streaming PS3 games

Kid Fury Reaction GIF
I have a 5950x and a 2080 and even this cannot run gt6 a 60fps last time I tried.

Sony paying the for trying to push the envelope with ps3.
 
Last edited:

Chukhopops

Member
Why on earth would I go to gamepassport.net instead of the official gamepass site?

Gamepassport.net includes things like coming soon in their counts and some of the removed ones are there still. Anyway i didn't want to get into some lengthy list wars debate about numbers as I said I wasn't being precise. Just pointing out it includes a whole bunch of BC games which some counted on one side and excluded on the other.
You said it was half, you can’t talk bullshit and expect nobody to say anything. Now we can agree you were wrong and move on.
 

Swift_Star

Banned
No it isn't hence most PC and Xbox gamers not subscribing.
Not that I disagree with you, but it’s fun seeing someone saying that in a world people pretend everything is going to gamepass.
Just giving my opinion like you do for pages and pages in every single Xbox thread, but unlike you, I don't make of comments in PS threads very often and when I do comment I don't go on for pages and pages like you and your Sony Bros.
i barely go to Xbox threads, only those that is acquisition talk. I have no interest in their services or products, so that point is moot.
 
65 games are from X360 or Xbox generation. And majority of them are either great games from EA (Dead Space, Dante Inferno, Dragon Age) or they are there because of Rare Replay Collection. So let's not pretend that GP is heavily lifted by those. Because most important aspect of GP are day one releases, first party games and AAA third party releases some time after they came out

And Sony first party year and half after they released? So I can subscribe for a same price that I can buy those games at that time? No thanks

Let's be fair here: on the 1P front Microsoft has not been consistent with GamePass. All of their 1P releases seem to be clogged to the last quarter of the year, so if someone wanted to subscribe for those they would simply skip subscribing until the last three months, get their fill, then unsubscribe again. Especially if a game like Halo Infinite, which was supposed to retain a high number of subscribers with regular big content and features, isn't doing its job.

They also haven't been as aggressive with 3P Day 1 inclusions either, IMO. Last year they got The Show and Outriders as big surprises, and I guess Back 4 Blood counts as a third. They have The Show again this year, but now that's expected, fruit bore from something they did last year, not this year. They should've had STALKER 2 by now but the devs are unfortunately in a difficult situation due to Ukraine/Russia conflict. There was a rumor for RE Village but MS came right out and dismissed that shortly after.

No other major 3P gets for GamePass to fill out the schedule, so if that and 1P content on steady release were reason some subbed, those are two reasons why some may not actually be subbed right now. It's mainly been small indies carrying the service this year, seems that'll be the case until The Show but more generally, until Plagues Tale for anyone who doesn't care about sports. And that is sometime this summer 🤷‍♂️ .

I hope they actually do manage to reach that '1 big AAA game per quarter' goal starting later this year. Starfield for Q4, Redfall for Q1 2023 (I think it's gonna get delayed), Forza for Q2 2023 (also think that's gonna be held off from this year), maybe Contraband Q3, Avowed Q4. Just get a consistent schedule going.

So is this sustainable for Sony or is it losing them money, if Game Pass is losing money?

Well, considering they aren't doing Day 1 for 1P games, I assume it'll at least be sustainable 🤣
 
19 pages of predictable "bbbut no day one games!!!" by the usual trolls who are active 24/7 :messenger_tears_of_joy:
Even if that was totally obvious since the beginning and already well known.
Actually I find interesting that Jim Ryan has left the door totally open about it in the future claiming that things can change quickly and that no one saw them publishing games on PC just a few years ago.

An other interesting point is that Jim Ryan hinted on Famitsu that old classics will feature improvements:

so it will be interesting to see the extent of that. The fact that PS1, PS2 and PSP games will be downloadable was a nice surprise for me, I expected all the retro games to be on the cloud.


In the end this is mostly a merging of their current services in a way that adds more value so that more people subscribe and current subscribers find enough reasons to upgrade.
I expect many gamers who don't buy a lot of games in a year (le'ts say just 4-5 games) to find great value in the extra option. At 99$ per year you have access to a 400 games library.
The premium tier is more aimed at core gamers but its success will depend a lot on the quality of the retrocatalogue, game trials if available for many new releases could become alone a big reason to upgrade.
Essential tier will continue to be the most successful option.
I hope it's at least what they did with PS2 games on PS4. Upped to 1080p and with AA. 4K would be awesome, but I'm not expecting it.
 

wipeout364

Member
It’s really pretty lame that they were so non specific about the PS1 PS2 and PSP games. Are they downloadable and playable locally, are they enhanced at all, load times. They could have at least given us a list of 50 to 100 titles to expect. Personally I think Sony should have charged more for the premium tier (20.00 US per month) and then thrown in day one access to their first party games.
 

Bitmap Frogs

Mr. Community
Let me understand: why?

There's an emulator available for PC that runs well and the recommended configuration is Vulkan compatible RX400 or newer (PS5: 5700 XT equivalent) and 6 cores and 12 threads (PS5: 8 cores, 16 threads).

If that PS5 under your tv was a pc running windows you could emulate PS3 games - why then is Sony not investing in an emulator to run them?
 

kingpotato

Ask me about my Stream Deck
Pretty disappointing news to be honest.

Specifically merging two services into 3 tiers. This is just going to be confusing as hell to the average consumer. Two tiers or, if only, a single service would have been so much better. Every single one of the console manufacturers are completely bungling these services, imo. Make it simple, make the value obvious and people will pay. This is complete tripe and I'm not looking forward to trying to explain it when the family member I gave my ps4 to comes asking questions.

The other part that would have been a nice gesture would have been to update all current subscribers to the premium tier initially. So you get a chance to see the benefits, great chance to upsell on the auto subscription as well.

Massive missed opportunities all around. I would fire my business unit lead if they put this in front of me, but I guess they know better.
 
hopefully you can just buy the ps1/ps2 games on their own
This is my concern. I just got a ps5, but damn I am not made of money or time. Those games aren't worth the price of that premium tier membership. Especially when i own a ps2, psp, vita ,ps3, and have a ps Classic with 512gb sd card attached. Would i like to have some ps1 and psp games on my ps5, you bet, but not at these prices.

Will keep essential just for the 100s of games I have on plus since its inception.
 

Neofire

Member
Jim might be coming to his senses, seen ab article on N4G where he said putting all the games on PSN plus would hurt them and he is exactly right. Seems someone is spitting some truth in his ears.

They aren't MS(with 100s of billions of cash to burn) and cover up losses like they can and say that everything is booming lol.
 

Tomeru

Member
Ok, serious question time:

Why is this not comparable to gamepass? Because no dsy 1 1st party? What is the dufference?
 
Microsoft are the only ones putting all their games onto a subscription service because they can. There's no real risk for them outside of losing some money and even if it doesn't work out, no big deal. Do you see anyone else rushing to do the same? Sony or Nintendo dont and 3rd party don't either. Hell, most big 3rd party releases from last year ain't on gamepass yet. So subscriptions may be the way for xbox but that doesn't mean it is for everyone else. It isn't even financially possible for most other companies.
 

Sakura

Member
Let me understand: why?

There's an emulator available for PC that runs well and the recommended configuration is Vulkan compatible RX400 or newer (PS5: 5700 XT equivalent) and 6 cores and 12 threads (PS5: 8 cores, 16 threads).

If that PS5 under your tv was a pc running windows you could emulate PS3 games - why then is Sony not investing in an emulator to run them?
Making a good emulator for the PS3 takes a lot of time and money.
Why do that when you can just stream the games?
I imagine that is the reasoning.
 

Swift_Star

Banned
Ok, serious question time:

Why is this not comparable to gamepass? Because no dsy 1 1st party? What is the dufference?
It is comparable. Apart from 1st party games, it’s the same thing. I predict Sony and MS will go head to head now in securing third party games to their services. The moneyhat strategy will change a little bit.
 
Last edited:

Elios83

Member
Because an emulator providing reliable results without glitches and frame rate issues on a significant amount of PS3 games doesn't exist (and the service will be available on PS4 as well and the base PS4 doesn't even have the raw power to handle a PS3 emulator).
They already have the infrastructure based on actual PS3 hardware to stream those games.
So the decision was obvious.
With PS1, PS2 and PSP games there are reliable emulators so local download is possible.
 
Last edited:

Ozriel

M$FT
Ok, serious question time:

Why is this not comparable to gamepass? Because no dsy 1 1st party? What is the dufference?

No day one first party is the huge one. No EA play. Obviously also lacks PlayAnywhere for PC players, no streaming of PS5 titles.


It is comparable. Apart from 1st party games, it’s the same thing. I predict Sony and MS will go head to head now in securing third party games to their services. The moneyhat strategy will change a little bit.

“Apart from a major selling point, PC support and EA Play as an added perk and next gen cloud streaming it’s the same thing”.
 
Last edited:

reksveks

Member
Ok, serious question time:

Why is this not comparable to gamepass? Because no dsy 1 1st party? What is the dufference?
its a dumb debate personally (not saying your question is) but if consumers are going to be deciding between the two with their time/$ then comparing them is fine.
 

DaGwaphics

Member
They also haven't been as aggressive with 3P Day 1 inclusions either, IMO. Last year they got The Show and Outriders as big surprises, and I guess Back 4 Blood counts as a third. They have The Show again this year, but now that's expected, fruit bore from something they did last year, not this year. They should've had STALKER 2 by now but the devs are unfortunately in a difficult situation due to Ukraine/Russia conflict. There was a rumor for RE Village but MS came right out and dismissed that shortly after.

I never saw 3P AAA Day 1s as the building blocks anyway, but, it's hard to say they've dropped the ball there since last year there were only 3 and before that none. And, like you said 2 would have already been announced without the Stalker delay, with the rest of the year to get another one.

Most important pieces for me is the 1P day 1s, the AAA older titles from 3P, and the day 1 indies.
 

93xfan

Banned
I would go for the highest tier if PS1, 2 and PSP had trophies attached to them. But I know I’m in a minority wanting that. 🤷‍♂️
They tried that and it took too much work. Pretty sure that’s why PS2 games were very lacking on PS4.

At least that’s what I remember
 
Let me understand: why?

There's an emulator available for PC that runs well and the recommended configuration is Vulkan compatible RX400 or newer (PS5: 5700 XT equivalent) and 6 cores and 12 threads (PS5: 8 cores, 16 threads).

If that PS5 under your tv was a pc running windows you could emulate PS3 games - why then is Sony not investing in an emulator to run them?
They probably figure its not worth the time or money to invest in that compared to going the cloud route.

And lets be real, how many people are really interested in playing PS3 games in 2022?
 
It would require significant time and investment to get up and running and working it a seamless way. I'm pretty sure the Xbox solution took a lot of time and hard work, and this would require the same. But obviously it's possible. They just don't care enough. If it's not big mainstream blockbusters that can print money, Sony don't give a shit. And their internet fanboys have given them a free pass with their "no one buys new consoles for old games" mantra.
 

Chukhopops

Member
Ok, serious question time:

Why is this not comparable to gamepass? Because no dsy 1 1st party? What is the dufference?
Unless they change significantly PSNow the differences are:
- slightly less than half of the catalog is streaming only
- catalog is four years older on average
- 0.5% of the catalog was released in 2021 or 2022
- significantly lower average metacritic
- no day 1 games (although there have been two exceptions)
- first party games rotate out of the service

All of this could change of course.
 

kingfey

Banned

Games industry analysts have offered their reactions to Sony’s new three-tier PlayStation Plus subscription service.

GamesIndustry.biz asked a number of notable business pundits for their views on the new announcement and the responses were mixed.

Most agreed that Sony‘s decision not to add first-party games to the service on the day of release would make it less of a draw than Xbox Game Pass, but were divided on how much of a problem this was.

Piers Harding-Rolls of Ampere Analysis claimed that the decision means the new structure “won’t have the pull of Microsoft‘s service”, adding: “Where I think Sony will try to be more aggressive is with windowing between release of its new games and them being added to the service, and when adding new releases from third party developers and publishers.”

When asked how the decision would affect the success of the service, Michael Goodman of Strategy Analytics replied: “That’s a question that ultimately the market is going to dictate.

“Microsoft’s chosen that day and date has been a critical factor for their success, and I think it has been,” he explained. “We will have to see how important that is to PlayStation fans.

“There is certainly an argument to be made that it is not critical. Nintendo has done a great job with Nintendo Switch Online – it’s been wildly successful just being a back catalogue product.

“However, Microsoft’s big growth happened when they went day and date. It’s worth noting they’re not competing head-to-head on this. They’re mostly talking to their existing install base.”

Goodman also noted that only around 5% of PlayStation’s install base currently subscribes to PlayStation Now, as opposed to over 40% of Xbox owners. As such, the vast majority of PlayStation owners have still yet to sign up to a ‘games on demand’ subscription service on their system.

Lewis Ward of IDC argued that the new structure will likely pay off for Sony, mainly because the current number of PlayStation Now subscribers is comparatively low.

“We’ll see if Sony reveals anything about how subscribers break out by tier over time, but it doesn’t appear to be a high bar to keep Premium subscribers at or above the four million mark [IDC’s current estimate for PS Now subscribers] in 2022, while also landing a sizable new, download-only Extra subscriber base,” he said.

Sony’s new PlayStation Plus structure will launch for PS4 and PS5 in June, structured across three payment tiers: Essentials, Extra and Premium.

While the Essentials tier offers the same benefits as the current PS Plus service, Extra will include 400 downloadable PS4 and PS5 games, while Premium will include cloud streaming access as well as a further 340 PS1, PS2, PS3 and PSP games (all of which are downloadable except PS3 games, which will be streaming-only).
 

Swift_Star

Banned
Unless they change significantly PSNow the differences are:
- slightly less than half of the catalog is streaming only
- catalog is four years older on average
- 0.5% of the catalog was released in 2021 or 2022
- significantly lower average metacritic
- no day 1 games (although there have been two exceptions)
- first party games rotate out of the service

All of this could change of course.
It’s stated they’re focusing in creating partnership with third parties, so the catalog will change and refresh faster and will have better quality than what it is right now.
 
Last edited:

Riky

$MSFT
I still own my PS1 and PS2 disc collection, will be interesting to see if that gives me access to these downloads, it should do.
 

Guilty_AI

Member
The most likely reason i heard so far is because officially recognizing a third-party emulator can open the doors for tricky legal situations, even if it isn't illegal. So they would have to build their own ps3 emulator from the ground up, in which case streaming is just a most cost-effective solution.
 
Last edited:
They tried that and it took too much work. Pretty sure that’s why PS2 games were very lacking on PS4.

At least that’s what I remember
Yeah I remember that too.

Though I think there was a patent about trophies for retro games, but of course most often patients don’t mean much.
 

Dr Bass

Member
This is a joke. More expensive that Game Pass and certainly inferior.

Everyone needs to quit calling this a competitor to Game Pass it's definitely not that, although I have no doubt there will be a certain group of people here on GAF now claiming this is GRRREATEST thing ever for gaming :pie_roffles: :messenger_tears_of_joy: :pie_roffles:
It's not a Game Pass competitor and never will be. Anyone with a brain understood that and knew that going into the announcement of this service update. Sony wants to make money. They can't afford to give away all of their internally developed games for a fraction of the normal retail cost. There is no way that math ever works out with the size of the industry the way it is. Same goes for Nintendo. This is not Sony responding to GP at all. They are consolidating their services and slightly expanding the offerings. It makes complete normal business sense. Nintendo doesn't respond to GP either. But they did offer a higher tier for their sub service, again, with more back catalogue of stuff people aren't buying anymore. It's all just pure profit. Again, makes business sense. None of these things are GP competitors.

If SONY fans that don't have Game Pass can constantly troll any and every Xbox Game Pass thread, why can' Xbox fans give their opinions on Sony's alleged competitor?
You're not giving an opinion really.

At least you admit you’re trolling and adding nothing of value to the discussion.
This person has it right unfortunately, and this is what you always do, sadly. Your post history is getting increasingly angry sounding for whatever reason.

I still don't understand how someone can say they like games, yet hate a platform. I mean, how can you be "CatLady" and not want Stray on PS5? I actually am a cat person and will buying this (unless it's a turd in a litter box of course) when it releases. But you won't get it because it's a PlayStation game? You just don't like games. You don't. You like Xbox. Big difference. If you're happy with what Xbox is giving you why not go enjoy it and leave the discussion of gaming to people who own and play on everything? I'm not trying to be mean, but this kind of behavior just doesn't make any sense to me as someone who likes games. I'd still happily add you on XBL as I welcome everyone on this board onto my friends lists, but man ... what a bummer people will willfully hate or ignore games because of the platform they are on.

Definition of a fanboy/girl: Someone who cares about the delivery of the medium far more than the medium itself.

-------

Back to the thread at hand.

Just for the record. I'll probably stick with the cheapest tier as all I really need is the online access. Not that interested in a ginormous catalog of old stuff. I really wish you could just one off buy old titles. I would probably end up spending more that way too, 120 a year for the highest tier ends up being only ten bucks a month. Surely I could spend more than that buying actual titles, while actually being subscribed to the 60 dollar tier for the network features.
 

ethomaz

Banned
t19jKZA.png


Did some quick whatifs on possible revenue increase.
They will have to get a better than 60:20:20 to have a substancial increase in revenue.
Or attract more users that PSNow alone was not doing.

Like I said I don’t see getting anything except Essential… PS Now was never a product to aimed to me.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom