• 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.

Sony’s PlayStation Game Pass Reveal Could be Imminent as PS Now Subscriptions Change to PS+

MrFunSocks

Banned
- PlayStation is on first position, while Xbox is on the last.
- PS+ has almost 50 million subscribers, while Gamepass has 25 million subscribers.
- PS+ is profitable, while the Gamepass model still hasn't proved itself to be self-sustainable and profitable in the long term.
A few things wrong with this post but I’ll focus on these ones.

1. Nintendo is first place, Sony is second.
2. PS+ is not equivalent to Game Pass, it’s equivalent to Xbox Live Gold. Game Pass is a separate subscription.
3. Extends from 2 - Xbox Live is profitable too. Microsoft have said game pass is sustainable so any suggestion otherwise is pure speculation that’s going against what they have said, and I’m pretty sure they know a bit better than you.
 

Kagey K

Member
So pretty much zero changes other than adding timed trials to PS Now. Don’t really understand the hype in that case.
If it exists as rumored it's going to flop spectacularly, but we will never know, because they will report all users as 1 number regardless of what tier they are on.

As the rumors exist its:

Ps+
10/month
Ps+ Now
12/month
Ps+ Now and Trials and classic games. 16/month

The 16/month seems like a mix between EA Access demos and Nintendo Online.
 

EDMIX

Member
A big portion of PS Now games are downloadable.


Oh really? Well this is why you here Omali lol

I completely forgot, I don't have it, don't plan on using it, so any update like that wasn't really on my mind. Maybe I should give a fuck if they really do fuse those services and I can just download what I want. I'll keep a closer eye on this then normal lol
 

MrFunSocks

Banned
If it exists as rumored it's going to flop spectacularly, but we will never know, because they will report all users as 1 number regardless of what tier they are on.

As the rumors exist its:

Ps+
10/month
Ps+ Now
12/month
Ps+ Now and Trials and classic games. 16/month

The 16/month seems like a mix between EA Access demos and Nintendo Online.
Essentially it would be like MS removing EA access from game pass and adding another tier of Game Pass+ that included it.

I doubt it will “flop” purely because they’ll still have 50+ million paying for the lowest tier to play COD/Fortnite/FIFA online every year, and will get a few million that pay the extra few bucks a month. If I had PS+ I’d likely just pay at least the $2 extra a month for the middle tier. What’s most likely to happen though is that we’ll never know because they’ll obfuscate the numbers by only giving a single total figure for all 3 tiers combined.
 
Last edited:
- conveniently forgetting the xbox gold subs
XLG users were converted to GP
- first or last, Sony can innovate and stay competitive or lose market share. You don't stay on top by sitting on your hands.
That's only if GP is actually a successful model to entice users in comparison to PS's offering. If it's not, why would Sony lose market share?
- Gamepass is already breaking even, it's all gravy from here
Source?
- Subscription based models take years to cultivate and get to profit stages
Again, that's based on the assumption that you want to go there in the first place. For that, GP model has to prove that it is significantly more profitable than Sony's current profit model.
- Provides consistent cash flows that indivual games can't guarantee
- Prevents competitors from chipping away at thier user base by offering a better value
- Keeps players busy and active in the PlayStation ecosystem, leads to add on sales
I don't think there's any evidence for that last point. The "engagement" metrics are a myth. Money is the only thing that matters for businesses, not many how brakes were hit in GT7 or how many bullets were fired in Destiny.
 

Kagey K

Member
Nope, not a weird comparison but XLG subscribers were converted to GP through the $1 upgrade path.
Some were, some weren't. You have any way to quantify who are still gold subscribers and who were converted?

It doesn't happen automatically, they have to manually choose to switch.
 
Last edited:

EDMIX

Member
If it exists as rumored it's going to flop spectacularly, but we will never know, because they will report all users as 1 number regardless of what tier they are on.

As the rumors exist its:

Ps+
10/month
Ps+ Now
12/month
Ps+ Now and Trials and classic games. 16/month

The 16/month seems like a mix between EA Access demos and Nintendo Online.

Maybe, maybe not.

I thought many subscription things would flop and here we are lol I wouldn't get many of them tbh, but I just don't speak for the majority to pretend as if this will flop cause I don't use it. So I don't really know how that set up will work in the future if this is true as who knows how many will be more comfortable getting games this way
 
Oh really? Well this is why you here Omali lol

I completely forgot, I don't have it, don't plan on using it, so any update like that wasn't really on my mind. Maybe I should give a fuck if they really do fuse those services and I can just download what I want. I'll keep a closer eye on this then normal lol
Yep. I am in a country where I don't officially have PS Now. I still got that subscription for like $40 a year and I could download (not stream) all the downloadable games. That library just works like PS+, except the fact that some games eventually leave.
 

MrFunSocks

Banned
Nope, not a weird comparison because XLG subscribers were converted to GP through the $1 upgrade path.
Oh we’re still doing this crap even like 5 years since game pass launched are we? Everyone still using their free trials every time a new first party game comes out, and then sharing with their dozen family members?

Gold = PS+

That’s all there is to it. You seem to be under the impression that Xbox live gold doesn’t exist anymore and that all gold members got moved to game pass and they shut gold down? You don’t compare game pass subscribers to PS+ subscribers because they’re not the same thing.

Any attempt to continue saying they’re the same is just straight up console warring.

I’m sure you’ll never get so much as a warning for it though so you’ll just keep doing it.
 
Last edited:
A few things wrong with this post but I’ll focus on these ones.

1. Nintendo is first place, Sony is second.
I think they're pretty close, but I think Sony is the #1 company whether you look at it from the perspective of third-party support, console sale unit, or total revenue.
2. PS+ is not equivalent to Game Pass, it’s equivalent to Xbox Live Gold. Game Pass is a separate subscription.
That was the case but it's not anymore, as XLG users were converted to GP through the $1 upgrade path.
3. Extends from 2 - Xbox Live is profitable too. Microsoft have said game pass is sustainable so any suggestion otherwise is pure speculation that’s going against what they have said, and I’m pretty sure they know a bit better than you.
"sustainable" is a very vague term. Anyway, I used the word "self-sustainable" and "profitable." I'm sure if this service was profitable, MS would be shouting it off the top of rooftops, considering they have changed the direction of the division and put all their baskets in GP.

It'd be one of the biggest recent success stories in the gaming industry, and I'm sure MS would announce and celebrate it once that is the case.
 

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
Oh we’re still doing this crap even like 5 years since game pass launched are we? Everyone still using their free trials every time a new first party game comes out, and then sharing with their dozen family members?

Gold = PS+

That’s all there is to it. You don’t compare game pass subscribers to PS+ subscribers because they’re not the same thing. Any attempt to continue saying they’re the same is just straight up console warring.

I’m sure you’ll never get so much as a warning for it though so you’ll just keep doing it.
Who knew Heinsenberg007 had secret knowledge all Xbox Gold gamers converted to GP subbers with perfect 100% correlation.
 

Kagey K

Member
Maybe, maybe not.

I thought many subscription things would flop and here we are lol I wouldn't get many of them tbh, but I just don't speak for the majority to pretend as if this will flop cause I don't use it. So I don't really know how that set up will work in the future if this is true as who knows how many will be more comfortable getting games this way
When i say flop I really only mean for the highest tier.

PS+ users are going to keep thier PS+ sub to play online but it's hard to convince them the spend 6.00 more per month for what is essentially demos.

I guess I'm saying I'm not expecting exponential growth in numbers when this new service releases.
 
So according to you all Xbox Gold gamers are forced to be GP subbers? And it's currently capped at 25M GP users?
"forced"? I never said that, but I do believe that the large majority of XLG users have been successfully converted to GP. That was also MS's goal wasn't it? Hence, the $1 upgrade path.

Also, why wouldn't they convert when they could just pay $1 and get three years of GP. That's awesome value.

In addition, let's look at the ratio: PlayStation sold ~115 million PS4 consoles and had ~47 million PS+ subscribers. That's roughly 41%. Xbox sold ~50 million Xbox One consoles. 41% would give us ~20-21 million XLG subscribers. All those people + 4-5 million on PC would give them 25 million subscribers, which sounds very reasonable.
 
Some were, some weren't. You have any way to quantify who are still gold subscribers and who were converted?

It doesn't happen automatically, they have to manually choose to switch.
I totally understand it, and like all of us, I don't have any way to quantify it. But I think it makes sense that the large majority of people would subscribe, don't you think?

That was one of MS's goals to transfer the large majority of XLG users to GP by providing excellent value ($1 for up to 3 years of GP is amazing and the reason why so many jumped on it).
 

MrFunSocks

Banned
I think they're pretty close, but I think Sony is the #1 company whether you look at it from the perspective of third-party support, console sale unit, or total revenue.

That was the case but it's not anymore, as XLG users were converted to GP through the $1 upgrade path.

"sustainable" is a very vague term. Anyway, I used the word "self-sustainable" and "profitable." I'm sure if this service was profitable, MS would be shouting it off the top of rooftops, considering they have changed the direction of the division and put all their baskets in GP.

It'd be one of the biggest recent success stories in the gaming industry, and I'm sure MS would announce and celebrate it once that is the case.
1. It’s not close at all lol. Nintendo make like twice the profit Sony do, and now have the top selling console for the current and previous generation. There’s no way in which Sony is number one other than in your head.

2. No they weren’t lol. You need to stop spreading this outright lie. Do you legitimately think that there are no Gold Subscribers anymore? You’re saying that literally every Xbox live gold subscriber upgraded to game pass for $1 not just once, but somehow are getting free game pass forever lol. It’s complete bullshit and you need to stop spreading it.

3. Try to define it however you want, you’re still just making shit up. Microsoft are on record saying it’s sustainable. The way game pass works is that the subscription cost alone is not intended to make a profit - the profit comes from pulling people into the ecosystem, buying games, buying dlc, buying micro transactions, and being a constant source of reliable and predictable revenue.
 
Oh we’re still doing this crap even like 5 years since game pass launched are we? Everyone still using their free trials every time a new first party game comes out, and then sharing with their dozen family members?

Gold = PS+

That’s all there is to it. You seem to be under the impression that Xbox live gold doesn’t exist anymore and that all gold members got moved to game pass and they shut gold down? You don’t compare game pass subscribers to PS+ subscribers because they’re not the same thing.

Any attempt to continue saying they’re the same is just straight up console warring.

I’m sure you’ll never get so much as a warning for it though so you’ll just keep doing it.
Oh wow. Seriously bro?

We are talking about two companies' biggest subscription services, and that somehow becomes console warring? You're so weird; console wars are always on top of your mind. It's the reason why I don't engage with you.

Not everything has to be a console war. Grow up. I presented you an argument. A simple "I see your point, but I don't think PS+ and GP are comparable" would have been sufficient, and I'd have respected your opinion.
 
Last edited:

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
I think he actually believes that MS just charged them 1.00 and automatically converted them all over, even though the last Gold number MS gave was at about 46 mil, before they stopped reporting.
LOL

I guess MS wasted their time adding a link to pay $1 having people choose to activate GP, when in reality they secretly converted all Gold gamers under their nose regardless.

And I thought when I activated it, the email receipt I got was due to me purchasing it. I didn't know MS automatically converted me without my approval. MS has such incredible timing, they masked their tactic by sending me an email receipt at the same minute I clicked the link to confirm.
 

Kagey K

Member
LOL

I guess MS wasted their time adding a link to pay $1 having people choose to activate GP, when in reality they secretly converted all Gold gamers under their nose regardless.

And I thought when I activated it, the email receipt I got was due to me purchasing it. I didn't know MS automatically converted me without my approval. MS has such incredible timing, they masked their tactic by sending me an email receipt at the same minute I clicked the link to confirm.
He actually did give a reasonable response after I posted that, so I will give the benefit of the doubt.

But making blanket statements like all gold members are converted is a bit absurd.
 
I think he actually believes that MS just charged them 1.00 and automatically converted them all over, even though the last Gold number MS gave was at about 46 mil, before they stopped reporting.
1. It’s not close at all lol. Nintendo make like twice the profit Sony do, and now have the top selling console for the current and previous generation. There’s no way in which Sony is number one other than in your head.

2. No they weren’t lol. You need to stop spreading this outright lie. Do you legitimately think that there are no Gold Subscribers anymore? You’re saying that literally every Xbox live gold subscriber upgraded to game pass for $1 not just once, but somehow are getting free game pass forever lol. It’s complete bullshit and you need to stop spreading it.

3. Try to define it however you want, you’re still just making shit up. Microsoft are on record saying it’s sustainable. The way game pass works is that the subscription cost alone is not intended to make a profit - the profit comes from pulling people into the ecosystem, buying games, buying dlc, buying micro transactions, and being a constant source of reliable and predictable revenue.
LOL

I guess MS wasted their time adding a link to pay $1 having people choose to activate GP, when in reality they secretly converted all Gold gamers under their nose regardless.

And I thought when I activated it, the email receipt I got was due to me purchasing it. I didn't know MS automatically converted me without my approval. MS has such incredible timing, they masked their tactic by sending me an email receipt at the same minute I clicked the link to confirm.
Are you guys not reading what I wrote or am I not able to properly convey what I'm saying?

I never once said that 100% of XLG users were transferring to GP. I said "a large majority". And I still believe that it happened. Think about the other scenario: "MS couldn't even convince people to pay $1 and get GP for 3 years." I do not believe that happened. $1 for 3 years of GP is value you just cannot beat, and I do think that a large majority (> 70% of XLG users) availed that offer.

And, Kagey K Kagey K , Regarding 46 million, I think you're referring to MAU, not XLG users. Otherwise, please do present your source. I'd like to see and correct myself.

Anyway, I'll leave this conversation at that. Have a good day y'all.
 
Last edited:

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
Are you guys not reading what I wrote or am I not able to properly convey what I'm saying?

I never once said that 100% of XLG users were transferring to GP. I said "a large majority". And I still believe that it happened. Think about the other scenario: "MS couldn't even convince people to pay $1 and get GP for 3 years." I do not believe that happened. $1 for 3 years of GP is value you just cannot beat, and I do think that a large majority (> 70% of XLG users) availed that offer.

And, Kagey K Kagey K , Regarding 46 million, I think you're referring to MAU, not XLG users. Otherwise, please do present your source. I'd like to see and correct myself.

Anyway, I'll leave this conversation at that. Have a good day y'all.
Because not everyone cares about signing up for sub plans. Believe it or not, not everyone in the world signed up for Netflix even though they had their "FREE first month" for like 15 years. If you got proof all Gold gamers are GP subbers, where there's zero Gold only gamers, then fine show it.

Regardless, your comparison of PS+ vs GP is a terrible comparison for your usual pro-Sony narrative.

A better comparison is PS+ vs Gold, or PS Now vs GP.
 
Last edited:

Kagey K

Member
Are you guys not reading what I wrote or am I not able to properly convey what I'm saying?

I never once said that 100% of XLG users were transferring to GP. I said "a large majority". And I still believe that it happened. Think about the other scenario: "MS couldn't even convince people to pay $1 and get GP for 3 years." I do not believe that happened. $1 for 3 years of GP is value you just cannot beat, and I do think that a large majority (> 70% of XLG users) availed that offer.

And, Kagey K Kagey K , Regarding 46 million, I think you're referring to MAU, not XLG users. Otherwise, please do present your source. I'd like to see and correct myself.

Anyway, I'll leave this conversation at that. Have a good day y'all.
Damn dude I just gave you credit 1 post above this.

The MAU is over 100 million.


I was wrong it was 48 million Gold subscribers (not 46)

 
Last edited:
Because not everyone cares about signing up for sub plans. Believe it or not, not everyone in the world signed up for Netflix even though they had their "FREE first month" for like 15 years. If you got proof all Gold gamers are GP subbers, where there's zero Gold only gamers, then fine show it.

Regardless, your comparison of PS+ vs GP is a terrible comparison for your usual pro-Sony narrative.

A better comparison is PS+ vs Gold, or PS Now vs GP.
And what happens, in your opinion, when Sony merges PS+ and PS Now? What would you compare GP with in terms of measuring subscriber count?
 
Damn dude I just gave you credit 1 post above this.

The MAU is over 100 million.


I was wrong it was 48 million Gold subscribers (not 46)

I know current MAU is 100 million. I brought MAU of 46 million because you said "even though the last Gold number MS gave was at about 46 mil, before they stopped reporting." So it was clear that you were talking about the data they once presented a few years ago (and at that point, the numbers would be 46 million, before it now jumped to 100 million +).

And that Forbes article is actually incorrect. Xbox Live is different than Xbox Live Gold. Xbox Live refers to the MAU (which is now 100 million+, back the it was 48 million). Xbox Live Gold is the paid subscription. You can actually confirm it here: https://www.statista.com/statistics/531063/xbox-live-mau-number/

Microsoft also uses the same term in their Financial Reports. The 'Xbox Live' refers to the free MAU.

"We are gaining console share, as gamers recognize the value of our broader ecosystem. Xbox Live has more than 100 million monthly active users, while Game Pass now has 18 million subscribers. And, we are transforming how games are distributed, played, and viewed, bringing cloud gaming in Game Pass to iOS devices and Windows PCs over the next few months," Nadella said.
 
Last edited:

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
And what happens, in your opinion, when Sony merges PS+ and PS Now? What would you compare GP with in terms of measuring subscriber count?
If it becomes too hard to compare numbers in your list war world, how about dont even bother caring?

Apple doesn't even break out detailed stats about their product lines. When it comes to profits (one thing you are begging to compare), they lump all physical products into one giant bucket, and then have Services as the only other bucket.

No matter how hard you try, you wont be able to tell how profitable Macs are vs. Phones vs Watches etc.... It's one lump sum.

If no Apple shareholders care about these important details, why do you care so much about videogame console MP/sub plan subscriber numbers?
 
Last edited:

dvdvideo

Member
XLG users were converted to GP

That's only if GP is actually a successful model to entice users in comparison to PS's offering. If it's not, why would Sony lose market share?

Source?

Again, that's based on the assumption that you want to go there in the first place. For that, GP model has to prove that it is significantly more profitable than Sony's current profit model.

I don't think there's any evidence for that last point. The "engagement" metrics are a myth. Money is the only thing that matters for businesses, not many how brakes were hit in GT7 or how many bullets were fired in Destiny.

Gamepass users were not all converted from gold, and your forgetting the millions of still current gold only subs completely. This shows you don't understand it at all.

You honestly think gamepass won't draw any people away with the value it offers? That's just silly.

The source that gamepass was break even was ms itself, probably more reliable than yourself.

Why do you assume it's a gamepass model or nothing? Why can't Sony sell millions of copies and a gamepass to other users? The one doesn't exclude the other, ms has proven that.
 
Whatever the middle tier is they have to do more than pull across the PS Now library. Some of those games will have to go into the premium tier (PS3) anyway, but I think it needs to be a bit more curated for quality.
 

EDMIX

Member
They should provide MP modes day one for free in some of their PS+ tiers.

That would have to be for Sony published games or something, I don't really see much publishers looking to do that. Look at how BF 2042 is tanking in players, imagine that fucking service wrecking that game even more lol So I don't see how that would make a publisher care, but I do see how Sony might benefit or something.

Whatever the middle tier is they have to do more than pull across the PS Now library. Some of those games will have to go into the premium tier (PS3) anyway, but I think it needs to be a bit more curated for quality.

That would be cool if those old PS3 games could be downloaded with that tier or something, I don't see much I'd play, but it sounds like many would use it if it had many platforms from the past supporting it or something
 
That would have to be for Sony published games or something, I don't really see much publishers looking to do that. Look at how BF 2042 is tanking in players, imagine that fucking service wrecking that game even more lol So I don't see how that would make a publisher care, but I do see how Sony might benefit or something.



That would be cool if those old PS3 games could be downloaded with that tier or something, I don't see much I'd play, but it sounds like many would use it if it had many platforms from the past supporting it or something

By most accounts everything bar PS3 will be downloadable. Everything will be streamable.

The PS+ collection is such a good starting point. If they went after more recent 3rd party games across all genres then that middle tier would be very appealing to many.

I think the game trials are in the wrong tier too. That initiative is about converting trials into sales and it being exclusively in the most expensive tier doesn’t work to its maximum there.
 
Last edited:
That would have to be for Sony published games or something, I don't really see much publishers looking to do that. Look at how BF 2042 is tanking in players, imagine that fucking service wrecking that game even more lol So I don't see how that would make a publisher care, but I do see how Sony might benefit or something.
Considering Sony's focus on live-service MP games now and their willingness to be multiplatform for those games, I think they might really explore that option.

For instance, if Bungie's next game is releasing on PlayStation, PC, Xbox, etc., is live service, has MTX and planned paid expansion packs (ala Witch Queen), they might just tap into those 50 million+ subscribers and give that game for "free".

1. That'll differentiate the platforms and incentivize playing a PlayStation Studios first-party game on a PlayStation console.
2. That could increase the game's potential for in-game revenue.

A large userbase for an MP game can do wonders.

Sony is searching for its Fortnite, Apex Legends, etc. This is one of the ways they can explore in search of that.
 
 

Mr Moose

Member
Damn dude I just gave you credit 1 post above this.

The MAU is over 100 million.


I was wrong it was 48 million Gold subscribers (not 46)

Xbox Live, not Xbox Live Gold.

Xbox Live monthly active users grew 30% year-over-year to a record 48 million

Not sure what this is based on:
The 48 million subscribers pay between $5 and $10 a month for access (depending on which bundle they purchase). If all 48 million subscribers stay on for the whole year then that would generate at least $2.88 billion for the company in 2016. Not bad for a product that some considered an afterthought when it was launched.
But it doesn't say it here:

Following MS bad model 🤣🤡
What model would that be?
 
Last edited:

MasterCornholio

Gold Member
1. It’s not close at all lol. Nintendo make like twice the profit Sony do, and now have the top selling console for the current and previous generation. There’s no way in which Sony is number one other than in your head.

2. No they weren’t lol. You need to stop spreading this outright lie. Do you legitimately think that there are no Gold Subscribers anymore? You’re saying that literally every Xbox live gold subscriber upgraded to game pass for $1 not just once, but somehow are getting free game pass forever lol. It’s complete bullshit and you need to stop spreading it.

3. Try to define it however you want, you’re still just making shit up. Microsoft are on record saying it’s sustainable. The way game pass works is that the subscription cost alone is not intended to make a profit - the profit comes from pulling people into the ecosystem, buying games, buying dlc, buying micro transactions, and being a constant source of reliable and predictable revenue.

told you so GIF


And now your banned forever. Can’t say they didn’t give you plenty of chances here. Don’t come back with an alt I don’t want to have to see your dumb comments again.
 
Xbox Live, not Xbox Live Gold.

Not sure what this is based on:

But it doesn't say it here:

Yep, that Forbes article was outright wrong and had incorrect information, as I highlighted to Kagey K Kagey K . The author of the article did not understand the intricacies of the service - I doubt if he ever played on an Xbox console because he had no idea what he was talking about.

As evidenced by the Satya Nadella quote, MS itself uses "Xbox Live" (which is different from Xbox Live Gold) to refer to MAU -- similar to how PlayStation uses PSN (which is different from PS+).
 
I hope it's good, I'm just ready for it to be incredibly underwhelming.

Old game streaming just isn't gonna be good enough if that's what it is. The old farts playing old games don't want to play them with input latency.

If they've been playing them in emulators then they've always been playing with input latency TBH.

PS Now isn't? It's a subscription service where you rent games via either downloading or streaming. How is that nothing like GamePass?

They're probably referring to the fact you can't download games through it and may not get a pricing discount buying a game that's in the rotation. And also because AFAIK, you can't stream games to mobile (but you can access PS Now on PC), and 1P games will probably not be Day-and-Date (though I think there's a way they could do this without upsetting their current business strategy, i.e per-game contract subscriptions).

Outside of that though, yeah the two services are pretty similar.
 
Last edited:
That and/or a group of people who just do not understand how things would actually work in the business world. I don't want to talk down a company or its strategy with this commentt, but let's look at it realistically from Sony's POV:

- PlayStation is on first position, while Xbox is on the last.
- PS+ has almost 50 million subscribers, while Gamepass has 25 million subscribers.
- PS+ is profitable, while the Gamepass model still hasn't proved itself to be self-sustainable and profitable in the long term.

Considering the above, there is 0 reason why Sony would want to create a Gamepass when Microsoft itself hasn't been able to prove the success of this model even after 5 years.
Why are y’all comparing PS+ to gamepass like Xbox Live Gold doesn’t exist?
 
Top Bottom