• 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 is requiring devs to offer timed game trials for PS+ Premium subscribers for games that cost more than $34 (Update: Wholesale Pricing)

Exactly. It's typical Sony. Want to have their cake and eat it, too.
They could make this a free service, but they don't. They could refund games if buggy, but they don't. They could give developers a choice and/or pay them for the demo, but they don't.

They only want stuff that benefits them and everyone else has to burden the work, costs ND risks.
They learned it from the best. Why give something away for free if you can charge for it and people won't think twice about paying for it?

Nothing was behind a paywall on PS3, you could even install Linux. The result? They lost market share to a competitor that had everything behind a paywall, including absurd things like apps and the web browser. That is what shaped modern Sony.

Just like microtransactions the battle against the paywall was lost long ago. I'm game to pretend that we are outraged about this to see if they make it a system wide policy but I don't like our odds.
 
Last edited:

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
I find it very odd that a guy who is professional in the industry isn't asking more questions rather than expressing outright negativity and sarcasm with no more details about this than anyone else.


Happy Joaquin Phoenix GIF
 

Tripolygon

Banned
Again you are missing the point about defaults but let's move on
If I understand you correctly, you are talking about corporations preying on people being less likely to ask for a refund even if they don't like something.

How is that good for consumers?

With this route, the default is you can try before you commit to buying instead of having to put your money upfront. It is the same tactic corporations use when they offer free trials but you have to give them payment information because often people forget to cancel.
 
You're assuming that people would rather spend $60 first and then get a refund later. Rather than pay nothing upfront, play the game for 2 hours, and just not buy the game if they don't like it.
In that sense it's an improvement, I would accept this on Steam as a replacement for what we currently have (obviously not behind a paywall). Just ask for the person to agree that by not participating in the trial he is waving his two hours refund window, it simplify things and it works great against the pre-order practice that I don't see as a good thing for digital goods anyway.
 
Last edited:
Why would you as a consumer avoid a platform over a feature that nets you the user 2hr trial of every major title? Trials and demos don't cost money but the majority of developers don't provide it. This makes it a platform requirement for major publishers and studios. You as a consumer lose nothing as that same demo can be provided for free to everyone by the developers.
If those 2 hour trials were free I'd completely agree with you. Historically trials/demos didn't cost money as you acknowledged so it's not great to change that. Making it a requirement doesn't really sound like an amazing deal for the developers either. So customers are paying for something that was free and developers are offering something they may not have bothered with in the first place. I CAN certainly see the benefit for Sony and perhaps that is what some care the most about.
 

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
I find it very odd that a guy who is a professional in the industry isn't asking more questions rather than expressing outright negativity and sarcasm with no more details about this than anyone else.



Ya think he's being sarcastic here cause he's getting tired of being bombarded by keyboard analysts over twitter ?
 

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
If only Sony and MS did mandatory 2 hour trials of the final game for all games for everyone (all tiers).

I guarantee that would shake up the industry to make better games.

Why do you think everything you buy at Costco is pretty good? That's because they got an unlimited return policy for most stuff, and that stuff gets returned back to the supplier for credit back to Costco. And the vast majority of returns get tossed in the trash for a loss. And since Costco is a physical goods kind of store, shit has a decent cost to it. It's not like software where the cost to transmit a file is probably a penny of bandwidth.

So what Costco's model does is keep suppliers on the best behaviour not to sell a lousy product.

Every company I've worked at (except one) has had Costco business and that line of products (even though small) always gets a ton of internal attention for quality and price. Nobody wants to feel the wrath of huge Costco returns and a product that will likely be delisted due to shittiness.
 
Last edited:

The headline should be: "Sony wants to implement the Steam refund policy behind a paywall", would get the right message across.

Sony is getting praised and criticized for the wrong reasons. The policy is great, the fact that it's behind a paywall isn't (but it is still inline with the bullshit console players have been subjected to since the Xbox 360 days).
 
Last edited:

Zeroing

Banned
Then they can choose to not release the game on Playstation. That is an option. I think it'll be less than 5% of devs and publishers that will find this to be an actual issue. Only trolls and fanboys will find issues with this. You can see the logical breaking apart in this very thread.

1. Some trolls complain that it's behind a paywall and it only has access to a small "VIP" group of people
2. Some trolls say it'll hurt devs because they'll lose too much money


Well......which one is it? Is it too niche or will it be too widely accepted by gamers? Make up your minds!
I’ll give you a hint! Don’t bother. There’s a pattern here. Examples

Tossing money at big publishers and devs to be on the service - good

Making a showcase presentation of indies - bad

Taking out twitter from your console os - good
Dev disables twitter account - bad

Service with trials that could be a good thing for consumers - bad

And so on. It’s like we as a collective are asking to be screw over and over by these big corporations.
 
I’ll give you a hint! Don’t bother. There’s a pattern here. Examples

Tossing money at big publishers and devs to be on the service - good

Making a showcase presentation of indies - bad

Taking out twitter from your console os - good
Dev disables twitter account - bad

Service with trials that could be a good thing for consumers - bad

And so on. It’s like we as a collective are asking to be screw over and over by these big corporations.
I haven't trusted this dude since he tried to push the narrative that Gamepass makes people buy more games. I'll never believe this shit, doesn't make any sense to me, so he just came off as very untrustworthy pushing PR spins.

He got relevant by supposedly being a guy that would just put out numbers but turns out he is most likely a paid shill.
 
Last edited:

Tripolygon

Banned
If those 2 hour trials were free I'd completely agree with you.
A demo created by a developer or publisher is made specifically as an advertisement to entice consumers to try the game and possibly could lead to a sale. This requires some work on the developer's end and the majority of developers don't bother with this because regular video ads and gameplay videos, twitch streams serve that purpose.

This is a system-level game trial feature and a platform mandate that all games of certain criteria must provide 2hr trials and is used by Sony as a benefit for their subscribers.

Historically trials/demos didn't cost money as you acknowledged so it's not great to change that.
Nothing is changing, developers still can provide demos just like they always had the ability to. As far as I'm aware nothing stops them from using this feature to provide a free trial outside of the PS+ sub. Sony did it from Sackboy and Death Stranding.

Making it a requirement doesn't really sound like an amazing deal for the developers either.
I am not a developer, I am a consumer and this benefits me. This does not even affect developers, it more concerns publishers and their relationship with Sony. No developer has to do any work to implement this.

So customers are paying for something that was free and developers are offering something they may not have bothered with in the first place. I CAN certainly see the benefit for Sony and perhaps that is what some care the most about.
There is no current platform that provides a free 2hr trial of all major games currently. If you subscribe to the service you get free trial just like EA offers 8hrs? of their games, if you sub to EA Play.
 

Zeroing

Banned
I haven't trusted this dude since he tried to push the narrative that Gamepass makes people buy more games. I'll never believe this shit, doesn't make any sense to me, so he just came off as very untrustworthy pushing PR spins.

He got relevant by supposedly being a guy that would just put out numbers.
For me anything that is written on twitter, I immediately assume is an irrelevant opinion or marketing PR.

I think people should see it this way! Things would become more clearer.
The way social media works specially twitter is, the more dramatic, more traffic you will get! If you say something everyone agrees nobody would notice your account! That’s how twitter works, twitter is a bunch of histrionic people fighting for attention.
 

mckmas8808

Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
A trial shouldn't cost any money at all. Also unless Sony allows for streaming of these trial games it would be quite cumbersome to download a full 50+GB title to play it for 2 hours. This should be part of the baseline PS+ Essential at most.

That's just gamer entitlement. You aren't entitlement to get game trials or demos for free. Nobody is doing this on a system level on Planet Earth literally. So, why should Sony be forced or asked to just give free game trials to people? Or even do so at the $5 a month level?

If you don't like it, it's okay for you to not pay the $10 a month for the PS+ Premium tier. But to ask as if it's "owed" to us is insane! At the very very least the competition would have to offer the same thing for a low rate per month, before you can ask Sony to do the same.
 

KungFucius

King Snowflake
The more I think of this the more I hate it. It is Sony requiring demos but using that to entice people into buying their service which is something that actually competes with publishers of games not on the service. I think demos are great and should be available to all potential customers because if they are on the fence, they are more likely to give you a couple of hours to try out your game then they are to plop down 70 bucks. It should be a win-win, but instead it is being kept behind a paywall.
 
The more I think of this the more I hate it. It is Sony requiring demos but using that to entice people into buying their service which is something that actually competes with publishers of games not on the service.
But wasn't one of the reasons for the push for subscription that it was good for publisher? Can't have it both ways.

To me it was always obvious that in the long run it was bad for publishers and for games and only good to platform holders. Now Sony is about to use that power in their favor.
 
Last edited:

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
He posted that sarcastic tweet immediately in line with the previous ones and it wasn't in response to anyone. Either way, he is supposed to be a professional.

There's a 28~ minute gap between his original tweet with the news and him saying this will receive pushback from publishers and the next tweets where he's sarcastically saying 'but please tell me how publishers work'. 28 minutes may as well be an eternity on twitter.

The feature is already there as evidenced by the existing trials on the store and through EA Play.

But please keep going.

Dude...EA Play already has trials on PS5. This isn't something new.


EA Play's trials are 10 hours long, and they're on the lower tier of their subscription service, and essentially bundled in 'free' with game pass ultimate, and their higher tier straight up gives full access to the game.

This (PS Now) trial feature is relegated to the highest tier of their sub service and the two lower tiers are shit out of luck.
 
Last edited:

schaft0620

Member
Dude...EA Play already has trials on PS5. This isn't something new.

EA creates the trials as part of their subs, I am not saying its something new, I am saying it takes labor.

The idea that there are like two of you in here that think this isn't going to take any labor blows my mind and I am done trying to convince you.
 
Last edited:

ToadMan

Member
A trial shouldn't cost any money at all. Also unless Sony allows for streaming of these trial games it would be quite cumbersome to download a full 50+GB title to play it for 2 hours. This should be part of the baseline PS+ Essential at most.

And Sony charges zero money for trials.

They’re forcing developers to implement a trial system but they aren’t limiting that to subscribers.

If anyone without premium subs cannot get the trial - that’s the publishers decision, not Sony.

But the pubs have no excuse - the system will be implemented because Sony insisted it is implemented.

Oh and streaming - lol. See you in 20 years.
 
Last edited:

GHG

Member
EA Play's trials are 10 hours long, and they're on the lower tier of their subscription service where the higher tier straight up gives full access to the game.

This (PS Now) is relegated to the highest tier of their sub service and the two lower tiers are shit out of luck.

That's not what is being discussed. Not at all.

EA creates the trials as part of their subs, I am not saying its something new, I am saying it takes labor.

The idea that there are like two of you in here that think this isn't going to take any labor blows my mind and I am done trying to convince you.

Allow me to repost my video:




Show me where the timer is that EA created.
 
Last edited:

skit_data

Member

Seems developers will be minimally impacted by the sounds of it.
Yeah, if this is how it will work it won’t be a problem at all and it could be considered a pretty consumer friendly service.

Edit: It should be a part of PS+ Extra as well though, IMO.
 
Last edited:

Topher

Gold Member
There's a 28~ minute gap between his original tweet with the news and him saying this will receive pushback from publishers and the next tweets where he's sarcastically saying 'but please tell me how publishers work'. 28 minutes may as well be an eternity on twitter.

It could be an hour and it doesn't matter. He posted three tweets in those minutes and none of them were in response to a tweet from anyone else.
 

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
That's not what is being discussed. Not at all.

Y'all keep changing what the active discussion point is so frequently.

From what I can see the two main points are that 1/ the trials are locked behind the highest tier and the lower tiers get nothing and 2/ forced trials would probably piss off publishers.

For point 2, the comparison with EA Play is still a bit irrelevant as EA Play trials are EA's choice on their own published games, they're not making every publisher to do that.

-

The one remedy for point 2 is that/if Sony is taking full ownership of creating 'trial' time gates on games and letting people download them and locking after the two hour is over, but that still leaves the other issue of this being locked behind the highest tier of their sub service. Value adding, yes, but they're basically locking demos behind a paywall no matter how anyone wants to paint it.


It could be an hour and it doesn't matter. He posted three tweets in those minutes and none of them were in response to a tweet from anyone else.

So ? The sarcastic reply is likely a response to people DM'ing him with stupid commentary. You don't write a reply like that without anything provoking it.
 
Last edited:

mckmas8808

Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
Maybe because there a difference between a platform holder and a single developer doing this policy? I can easily avoid EA titles as a whole. A lot harder to avoid the entire PlayStation ecosystem. Generally as a rule of thumb trials/demos don't cost money.

They don't cost money to who? The dev\publisher? Or the gamer?
 

GHG

Member
Y'all keep changing what the active discussion point is so frequently.

From what I can see the two main points are that 1/ the trials are locked behind the highest tier and the lower tiers get nothing and 2/ forced trials would probably piss off publishers.

For point 2, the comparison with EA Play is still a bit irrelevant as EA Play trials are EA's choice on their own published games, they're not making every publisher to do that.

-

The one remedy for point 2 is that/if Sony is taking full ownership of creating 'trial' time gates on games and letting people download them and locking after the two hour is over, but that still leaves the other issue of this being locked behind the highest tier of their sub service. Value adding, yes, but they're basically locking demos behind a paywall no matter how anyone wants to paint it.

You are aware that multiple threads of discussion can happen in a single thread right? Neither of those things you've decided to write paragraphs about are being discussed in either of the posts you previously quoted. If you want to discuss what you're writing about then find the appropriate posts and quote those.
 

mckmas8808

Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
I find it very odd that a guy who is a professional in the industry isn't asking more questions rather than expressing outright negativity and sarcasm with no more details about this than anyone else.



It makes you kinda question who is he really "working\speaking" for in this instance. Why is it that big major publishers push free betas so hard, yet they will be pissed about a 2 hour game trial? This whole fake outrage has me so confused today.

It's one of Sony's most gamer friendly things that they've come up with in the last 5 years and it's some of the "gamers" that are upset about it. Weird.....
 
Last edited:

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
You are aware that multiple threads of discussion can happen in a single thread right? Neither of those things you've decided to write paragraphs about are being discussed in either of the posts you previously quoted. If you want to discuss what you're writing about then find the appropriate posts and quote those.

I mean rather than tell me off and ask me to reread a multiple page thread, a simple brief one line of what exactly you were saying would have been nicer :messenger_grinning_sweat:



It's one of Sony's most gamer friendly things that they've come up with in the last 5 years and it's some of the "gamers" that are upset about it. Weird.....

I don't think gamers are upset about the trial thing itself, in an ideal case every game on every platform should either have a free trial, or a trial window in which they can safely refund the game.

This being kept behind a pay wall is what seems to be the problem, or at least that's the way I'm reading it.
 
Top Bottom