Your guess is similar to what others have said earlier in this thread. The problem is that this really does not make much sense if you consider what PlayStation Plus and PlayStation Now currently offer. Using your example:
- Tier 1 is essentially PS Plus as it exists now
- Tier 2 is PS Plus along with a reduced version of PS Now, for the same price as PS Plus and full PS Now. (More on this in a moment.)
- Tier 3 is PS Plus, the full PS Now, and PS1 and PSP games.
PS Now currently offers PS2, PS3, and PS4 games. Why should they remove PS2 and PS3 games from tier 2 and limit them to tier 3? Why not just leave well enough alone?
Also, is there
really that big of a retro inclined audience that would shell out an additional $5/month for PS1 and PSP games? I love the old games, but I'm not even sure that I would do that, myself.
I feel that there must be some inaccuracies with what Mr. Schreier is proposing in his article. There's no way that it will pan out exactly like this. As I said in an earlier post in this thread, I can see them rolling the PS1 and PSP games into tier 2 (because PS2 and PS3 games
already exist in PS Now), and then tier 3 would have some other highly attractive benefit (such as "day one" game releases--not necessarily all first-party games) to warrant an extra 5 bucks a month.