• 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+

yurinka

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.
No, the rumor is:
-Tier A: PS Plus $10/montth (same content as of now: monthly games, PS Plus Collection, onlline MP, cloud storage, discounts...)
-Tier B: PS Plus + PS Now (only downloadable games, no cloud gaming) $13/montth *
-Tier C: PS Plus + PS Now (complete, both dowloadable and cloud gaming)+extended demos of new games $16/month *

*= They would add hundreds of games more to the almost a thousand games that PS Now already has from PS1, PS2, PSP, PS3, PS4 and in a near future PS5. They would include newer games, but won't include all their 1st party games there day one. Day one would only feature some indie or AA game from time to time, something they already do.

The demos stuff isn't clear but seems to be similar to EA Play, to play pretty likely full new games but time limited to a few hours.

Why are y’all comparing PS+ to gamepass like Xbox Live Gold doesn’t exist?
Because it this Spartacus stuff is real, both Plus and Now would be merged becoming a single multi tiered service. And since GPU also includes Gold and there is a $1 upgrade to migrate from Gold to GPU, people assume most active Gold subs migrated to GPU because it's an awesome deal very hard to miss.
 
Last edited:
Gold is always left out of the discussion even though that's the model PS+ based itself on.
Think you got that the other way around. Gold was just a paywall for online and apps that Nintendo and Sony let people use for free, including Netflix, YouTube, and F2P games. PS+ started out by giving out free monthly games, as well as other benefits, like discounts. After XBO got curb stomped, MS started making Gold more like PS+. Hell, they finally removed F2P games and party chat from the paywall just last year.
 

Barakov

Member
Can’t wait to play day one exclusives!
* Day 1 Trials

:messenger_grinning_smiling:
Remember when trials used to be free? Of course trials are being rolled into a subscription plan in 2022. Of course.
sucks album art GIF by Epitaph Records
 

EDMIX

Member
No, the rumor is:
-Tier A: PS Plus $10/montth (same content as of now: monthly games, PS Plus Collection, onlline MP, cloud storage, discounts...)
-Tier B: PS Plus + PS Now (only downloadable games, no cloud gaming) $13/montth *
-Tier C: PS Plus + PS Now (complete, both dowloadable and cloud gaming)+extended demos of new games $16/month *

*= They would add hundreds of games more to the almost a thousand games that PS Now already has from PS1, PS2, PSP, PS3, PS4 and in a near future PS5. They would include newer games, but won't include all their 1st party games there day one. Day one would only feature some indie or AA game from time to time, something they already do.

The demos stuff isn't clear but seems to be similar to EA Play, to play pretty likely full new games but time limited to a few hours.


Because it this Spartacus stuff is real, both Plus and Now would be merged becoming a single multi tiered service. And since GPU also includes Gold and there is a $1 upgrade to migrate from Gold to GPU, people assume most active Gold subs migrated to GPU because it's an awesome deal very hard to miss.

This is one of theses things where I don't know how badly many really, really...REALLY want to play old games enough to pay for a whole service to get it. One of the biggest things we've heard regarding this is simply those older titles being able to be played, but i just don't see enough data to even show that many really want that content that badly tbh.


We saw something like 2% or something regarding BC on XB (I don't recall the data if anyone has a link) , I'm sure many PS gamers love old games, but I just don't see the data to suggest that if it has all the old line ups, that many will care as much as we think here on Gaf or something. Most gamers want new content.

More people played BF 2042 on Steam, then all the other BF combined when it released even with knowing how bad its beta was, that should show many that people will literally play a bad NEW game vs a great old game, even if its one of the best old games or something. So I don't know how this will play out, but i don't really feel that the whole PS1, PS2, PS3 etc will really be enough. Having a massive catalog doesn't mean the majority will really care besides us tbh. I say that as a massive PS fan btw.

Maybe that whole catalog if presented in a certain way can really make this work. Take Netflix's update to add in collections of content, if they do it that way, maybe that can change things, using their lineage as way to get those subs or something.



like "Only place to play all Persona games" shows Persona 1, 2, 3,4 and 5

or "Only place to place whole MGS series" shows Metal Gear Solid 1,2,3,4,5 etc

So it can work, but I have my own doubts if the majority really care about old content to that degree to carry this service.
 

MScarpa

Member
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.
What about Switch? That seems to be "#1" unless you just don't count it. And did you forget Xbox Gold cause that has more than 50mil subs. Just not sure what you're getting at?
 

MScarpa

Member
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.
What comment got him banned finally? In this day and age a VPN is all it takes unfortunately
 

S0ULZB0URNE

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.
 

yurinka

Member
This is one of theses things where I don't know how badly many really, really...REALLY want to play old games enough to pay for a whole service to get it. One of the biggest things we've heard regarding this is simply those older titles being able to be played, but i just don't see enough data to even show that many really want that content that badly tbh.


We saw something like 2% or something regarding BC on XB (I don't recall the data if anyone has a link) , I'm sure many PS gamers love old games, but I just don't see the data to suggest that if it has all the old line ups, that many will care as much as we think here on Gaf or something. Most gamers want new content.

More people played BF 2042 on Steam, then all the other BF combined when it released even with knowing how bad its beta was, that should show many that people will literally play a bad NEW game vs a great old game, even if its one of the best old games or something. So I don't know how this will play out, but i don't really feel that the whole PS1, PS2, PS3 etc will really be enough. Having a massive catalog doesn't mean the majority will really care besides us tbh. I say that as a massive PS fan btw.

Maybe that whole catalog if presented in a certain way can really make this work. Take Netflix's update to add in collections of content, if they do it that way, maybe that can change things, using their lineage as way to get those subs or something.



like "Only place to play all Persona games" shows Persona 1, 2, 3,4 and 5

or "Only place to place whole MGS series" shows Metal Gear Solid 1,2,3,4,5 etc

So it can work, but I have my own doubts if the majority really care about old content to that degree to carry this service.
I think BC is like gyms. Many people say it's great, some pay for it and then only a small portion of the ones who paid for it use it.

So I think they'd use it as you say more as marketing tool than for the real usage: it's appealing to say 'we have a gazillion games on this service', 'games from the entire history of PS', or as you said 'the whole X series' etc. So people may be appealed by stuff like that, get the service and to play mostly PS4 (and soon PS5) games, maybe only playing a bit a few old games.

And well, they would remove anoher thing of the list of things that players complain about/ask them to do (even if when implemented then nobody cares about it).
 
Last edited:

Edgelord79

Gold Member
Because it lets them downplay the success of Game Pass and they can remain in their echo chambers
They will most likely be incomparable as one is designed with one of the core tenets of attracting people to a platform (GamePass) and the other will be designed as an an almost needed service on a specific platform. There are people that have probably bought an Xbox specifically due to the amount of offerings on GamePass. If the rumors are true about the Playstation service offerings, this isn't going to make people to want to buy a Playstation, but as a requirement at some level for people who already have the console (for online play). They really aren't competition at all and both can exist in different spaces.
 

EDMIX

Member
What about Switch? That seems to be "#1" unless you just don't count it. And did you forget Xbox Gold cause that has more than 50mil subs. Just not sure what you're getting at?

Different markets. Would be like saying "Phones be #1"

I always think this is so funny when I hear this. Ehh whatever helps you sleep better. Unless Sony gives first party, day 1 tier, its still going to struggle against Gamepass. This coming from a PSNOW subscriber. Hope they bring some good stuff but it's Sony so i doubt it.

Who knows how they'll compete with them, its hard to tell as I personally don't plan to use either subscriptions.

You'd need to turn that shit into a Amazon Prime type deal. I got Prime over 12 years ago for school, business, I keep prime for those birthdays, holiday gifts, business etc and THEN when you factor their shows, its a must by them (especially after that MGM deal and all the money they've been putting in it and getting massive contracts like Fallout IP). My point, Sony must leverage their other concepts, that sub shouldn't just be solely on gaming as Amazon is not solely on JUST 1 day shipping or something, think about it for min.

PS Sub for gaming downloads of classics, new titles on current gen added to the vault, someone like me might consider.
oh btw it includes Sony music library for streaming, their Anime subscription service thrown in etc and you can really build a long term base. As you might start off with it for 1 thing and keep it for another. If Sony can make that offer make sense, they can have a giant on their hands.
 
What about Switch? That seems to be "#1" unless you just don't count it.
In my subsequent comment, I mentioned: third-party support, total gaming revenue, most current console units sold. PS comes on top on all those metrics. Nintendo does come on top in terms of ROI though.
And did you forget Xbox Gold cause that has more than 50mil subs. Just not sure what you're getting at?
You're a little late to the conversation; I explained earlier by Gold shouldn't count anymore as a separate sub. My reason being that a large majority of Gold subs would have been converted to GP by now. Just like PS Now subs shouldn't count once they are merged with PS+. Otherwise, we run into the issue of duplication.

Also, Gold DOES NOT have 50 million subs. Microsoft never actually released that number. When people say 50 million subs, they are confusing Xbox Live Gold with Xbox Live (which refers to the free Xbox account or MAU). XLG numbers would be like ~20 million last gen, as per my estimation.

Source 1: https://www.statista.com/statistics/531063/xbox-live-mau-number/
Source 2:
"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," - Satya Nadella
 
Last edited:

ZehDon

Member
I think BC is like gyms. Many people say it's great, some pay for it and then only a small portion of the ones who paid for it use it.

So I think they'd use it as you say more as marketing tool than for the real usage: it's appealing to say 'we have a gazillion games on this service', 'games from the entire history of PS', or as you said 'the whole X series' etc. So people may be appealed by stuff like that, get the service and to play mostly PS4 (and soon PS5) games, maybe only playing a bit a few old games.

And well, they would remove anoher thing of the list of things that players complain about/ask them to do (even if when implemented then nobody cares about it).
If by a small portion you mean 50% of players on Xbox use BC, then sure. There's a reason Nintendo charges a subscription for access to their back catalogue on Switch. Don't underestimate the draw of high quality games, regardless of their age - especially if they're able to offer up improvements like Xbox has.
 

EDMIX

Member
If by a small portion you mean 50% of players on Xbox use BC, then sure. There's a reason Nintendo charges a subscription for access to their back catalogue on Switch. Don't underestimate the draw of high quality games, regardless of their age - especially if they're able to offer up improvements like Xbox has.
I think you mean used* BC =)


Its dated from 2016 and he likely means tried it vs a constant number or something. We have enough to show majority of gamers don't even fucking play shit that was put out 6 months ago let alone several generations ago. The vast majority simply plays what is current, new and then move on weeks later, I don't see any data outside of that 1 claim about who used it before to really argue the majority or even REALLY play old games like that. As someone that plays many, many old games myself, I fucking know I'm not in the majority on this one bud, we have enough data to prove most are really not doing that lol


their own fucking data shows majority are not doing this lol

So I think that comment had more to do with who tried it when it was first put out and not some hard figure that is a always at all times type deal, I have a hard fucking time believing that as not a single platforms data exist to show us this, not even theirs lol


Whats even funny, is the remaster for Mass Effect is on that list, yet not the fucking original thru BC, as in even a fucking remaster will get more playing then the original, THAT is how much most don't play old games bud, even the ports of old games get higher on that list, remasters etc, it shows gamers play the majoirty current stuff, I've yet to see any data outside of 1 comment from 2016.

Can Sony do well with some Subscription with old PS1, PS2, PS3 etc games? Maybe, but I don't see any fucking data that even shows most are playing those games right now even with many PS2 classics on PSN RIGHT NOW, they just don't make up enough to really buy that most really play old games to such a degree.

Example.


Not 1 PS1 or PS2 classic listed...

Ok, but about people playing?


I'm not even 100% sure how exact PS tracker is lol

Regardless, no PS1 classics, no PS2 classics. I love em, I still play them from time to time, shit I'm about to start Xenosaga 3, but sir....I at least understand I don't make up the majority in regards to how I game. I hope Sony does will with the new subscription thing if its even true and i have nothing against anyone playing those classics, but I have my doubts that playing PS1, PS2, PS3 etc will magically have them move monster units or something. They literally fucking have MORE older games and we still don't see that figure shown really anywhere to prove this idea man, old school gamers will love it like lots of us, but sir......current demographic gaming really doesn't give a shit about old games past 6 months let alone several generations and I don't see any solid data to say otherwise. So I believe 50% tried, I doubt that is what the figure is right now, all the time or something.
 
Last edited:

yurinka

Member
If by a small portion you mean 50% of players on Xbox use BC, then sure. There's a reason Nintendo charges a subscription for access to their back catalogue on Switch. Don't underestimate the draw of high quality games, regardless of their age - especially if they're able to offer up improvements like Xbox has.
Regarding previous gen gen I assume the percentage is high specially during the first years. I mean, I assume right now many/most PS5 and Xbox Series users may be using BC to play PS4 and XBO games. We also saw that due to price cuts, big discounts and GaaS/DLC focus now many companies have a good chunk of revenue coming from 'catalog games' these that are older than a year.

I meant low usage of older games than that, like two generations or more ago. I mean, like a PS5 user playing PS3 or older games, Xbox Series X user playing 360 or older games etc. In these cases, at least in my case, I think people mostly maybe checks out maybe a game during a very short period of time to remember how this game was, maybe for less than an hour.

I mean, I personally think people spends most of their play time with newer games, released now or a few years ago. Some people may check out way older games, but mostly dedicating to them a small portion of their playtime.

Example: I see a Gran Turismo fan mostly playing GT7 or GT Sport during dozens or hundreds of hours, and if they add all the GT games to Spartacus then he may go to check the first GT and play a few times, maybe during maximum a couple of hours and then will go back to play the new GTs.
 

The_Mike

Member
-Tier A: PS Plus $10/montth (same content as of now: monthly games, PS Plus Collection, onlline MP, cloud storage, discounts...)
-Tier B: PS Plus + PS Now (only downloadable games, no cloud gaming) $13/montth *
-Tier C: PS Plus + PS Now (complete, both dowloadable and cloud gaming)+extended demos of new games $16/month *
Players in the past - wow I wonder what the future will bring

2022 - wow I can pay to try this demo instead of buying it.

These tiers are pretty bad and they should feel ashamed if the rumors are true.
 

EDMIX

Member
Players in the past - wow I wonder what the future will bring

2022 - wow I can pay to try this demo instead of buying it.

These tiers are pretty bad and they should feel ashamed if the rumors are true.

Agreed. So much more needs to be added for me to really care at this point. Even the whole BC thing is irrelevant to someone like me how owns all my past systems, the fuck am I going to do with paying to play shit I already own? lol I get it for those who don't have those platforms, but the whole demos, streaming, I just don't see the appeal for my taste.

I do love playing older games, but thats why I still fucking OWN those games and OWN those systems, so this is a weird one lol

They need to add that Anime shit they've been taking as some service lol
 

The_Mike

Member
I do love playing older games, but thats why I still fucking OWN those games and OWN those systems, so this is a weird one lol
Personally I'd say it depends on how they implement it.

Microsoft updated some classic to better fps, higher resolution etc, which in my opinion would validate a replay.

Personally I doubt Sony will do it that way, but one can hope.
 

EDMIX

Member
Personally I'd say it depends on how they implement it.

Microsoft updated some classic to better fps, higher resolution etc, which in my opinion would validate a replay.

Personally I doubt Sony will do it that way, but one can hope.

True, didn't they have some patient talking about updating classics or something with some new engine or some shit? lol I don't recall the specifics, something about legacy mode or the patent was called that or something and it would enhance older games automatically or something.
 

yurinka

Member
Players in the past - wow I wonder what the future will bring

2022 - wow I can pay to try this demo instead of buying it.

These tiers are pretty bad and they should feel ashamed if the rumors are true.

Demos behind paywalls wouldn't be something new. In he past we saw the full game time limited trials on EA Play, and I think it was in PS Plus too while ago, or these demos locked to those who preordered a game, or demos locked to Plus/Gold, to name some examples.

But that would be a small part of the service, I mean the demos tier would include:
  • Monthly PS Plus games
  • PS Plus Collection for PS5
  • Online MP on console
  • Discounts for games and dlcs
  • Exclusive access to some content ('free' dlc/demos/games, like the upcoming 3 months of GTA Online for PS5)
  • 100GB of savedata cloud storage
  • Share Play
  • In-game help hints for PS5
  • Cloud gaming on console, PC (and soon mobile and smart vs) of over a thousand games from all PS home consoles and PSP
  • Hundreds of these games (depending on their platform) downloadable on console
  • Extended demos
I do love playing older games, but thats why I still fucking OWN those games and OWN those systems, so this is a weird one lol

They need to add that Anime shit they've been taking as some service lol
Well, all these subs are to rent games, you don't own them. To really own them you should buy them and in physical, so you can still own them once they shut down the servers somewhere in the future, plus allows you to sell them in second hand if desired.

Regarding anime, recently they started to merge all their anime content into Crunchyroll, something I assume they will want to milk there and will also need some time to complete the transitioning. But I see them including, at least some time after the release, the same deal they did with Gamepass that extends the free trial of their paid version, a discount to get the paid Crunchyroll sub or something like that.

I think they'll take some time first to add the new content they plan to add to Spartacus and Crunchyroll, plus to see how they perform, and I assume they'll also start to grow and tweak that Sony Netflix for movies and tv shows they have in a soft launch in a country (I think it was Poland). I think they may also do their own 'Spotify' to put all their music content on a Sony service. They will many deals and acquisitions to ensure all these services have enough appealing content.

And I assume that then some after that it's when they will start 'merging' their subs, like including the paid version of Crunchuroll in Spartacus etc. I think they'll grow step by step instead of doing all at the same time.
 
Last edited:

DarkMage619

Member
Think you got that the other way around. Gold was just a paywall for online and apps that Nintendo and Sony let people use for free, including Netflix, YouTube, and F2P games. PS+ started out by giving out free monthly games, as well as other benefits, like discounts. After XBO got curb stomped, MS started making Gold more like PS+. Hell, they finally removed F2P games and party chat from the paywall just last year.
Any idea when Sony will drop the pay wall for game save cloud storage? That matters a ton more than access to Netflix.
 

SSfox

Lies about why mods reply ban and warn me.
Why would they do what customers want when they can make more money by forcing them to pay for a bundle that includes something they don't want?

Where did I say they will 100% do it? And what make you think they 100% won't do it?

And as far as I'm concerned I posted something that i want, nothing more, nothing less.
 
Think you got that the other way around. Gold was just a paywall for online and apps that Nintendo and Sony let people use for free, including Netflix, YouTube, and F2P games. PS+ started out by giving out free monthly games, as well as other benefits, like discounts. After XBO got curb stomped, MS started making Gold more like PS+. Hell, they finally removed F2P games and party chat from the paywall just last year.
Lol so the gold that was doing the things you speak off at the end of the 360 generation was just my imagination.
 

dcmk7

Member

You said it was break-even as in its self-sustainable though?

I'm sure for Microsoft they can continue to sustain any losses, the Xbox division after all hasn't been synonymous with profitability, it's been sustained its entire existence as far as I can tell.

So no questions there, but is it really breakeven as you said? be interested to see a good source if you have one.
 

cragarmi

Member
Lol so the gold that was doing the things you speak off at the end of the 360 generation was just my imagination.
Actually I think it was during X360s Kinect phase that PS started giving away games with PS+ then Xbox followed suit a year or so later. Either way it was PS that started it off yes.

Edit: just checked and PS+ games started in 2010, Games with gold didn't start till 2013.
 
Last edited:

RAIDEN1

Member
I want to see how much support they give to the legacy collection...ie will the Ridge Racers, Virtua Fighter 4, Urban/Soviet Strike be available to check out?
 

Hezekiah

Member
Older games maybe, which makes it not really a direct competitor to gamepass.

Link to proof it loses money? Are you mathematically challenged? 4 billion a year in revenue plus regular sales, add ons, etc, is a automatically a loss? Please.
That's more than a 'shiny new coat' regardless of whether you interested.

Sony arent going to put their exclusives day one on a cheap subscription service, they're just not going to throw money away to claim market share.
 
Wait. This is your source? I can see why you didn't want to post it earlier. You may want to brush up on your English. Sustainable isn't the same as breaking even right now. MS are prepared to pump in $$ in order for the future pay off they see. They are investing and are willing to spend to grow the service.

How long will be take for GP to recoup the money spent on acquisitions to fill out the games on the service? Many years.
 
Last edited:

teezzy

Fantastik Tuna
As much as I adore Xbox, the dirty secret about GamePass that nobody wants to admit is that the large majority of the games on there are indie garbage I wouldn't touch in a million years

Enjoy that, I guess, Sony fans
 

dvdvideo

Member
You said it was break-even as in its self-sustainable though?

I'm sure for Microsoft they can continue to sustain any losses, the Xbox division after all hasn't been synonymous with profitability, it's been sustained its entire existence as far as I can tell.

So no questions there, but is it really breakeven as you said? be interested to see a good source if you have one.

I think it's pretty clear he's saying it's not losing money. It's revenue is near 4 billion a year, if the average AAA title costs 100 million to develop, that's a lot of games it can cover each year. It stands to reason adding more subs from this point costs them very little vs fixed costs since they own most of the content. Also very possible games like guardians of the galaxy are brought over at a fixed cost vs revenue sharing, so again there adding more subs is gravy.

Assume it's doing amazing things for them, would it be smart for him to come out publicly and let Sony know it's doing well for them?
He has to tow a line.
 

dvdvideo

Member
That's more than a 'shiny new coat' regardless of whether you interested.

Sony arent going to put their exclusives day one on a cheap subscription service, they're just not going to throw money away to claim market share.

Who's to say long term it doesn't make them more money and stabilize software cash flow.
And why wouldn't any company want to maintain market share if it's losing customers a little at a time?
 

Topher

Gold Member
As much as I adore Xbox, the dirty secret about GamePass that nobody wants to admit is that the large majority of the games on there are indie garbage I wouldn't touch in a million years

Enjoy that, I guess, Sony fans

I think the real value of Game Pass will be more obvious once Microsoft's studios start cranking out games. But yeah, right now there is a lot of filler stuff that I only ever fire up in xCloud for MS Rewards quests. I was happy to hear GoTG was coming to GP even though I already finished the game.
 
Top Bottom