OnlySP: Playstation Now was unveiled to the world yesterday as the Gaikai powered streaming service that will bring PSOne, PS2, and PS3 games to the PS4.
Hmm kind of good or bad depending what u outlook is!
i'm struggling to find the good
Yup, you shouldn't have to pay again to access something you own. If the PS4 had proper backwards compatibility then people could just put their disc in and play it fine (or play their digitally purchased version) and I can't help but wonder if they left b/c out with the sole intent of shaking more money out of people. It's probably the success of HD rereleases that has spurred this development, with the market sending a clear message of, "Hey, we will literally pay for something twice" and now they're going full steam ahead with it.
If you get free what you have now Sony would never make enough money to keep the service running don't you think? Maybe a discount or something would be good.
Bottom line, if you REALLY want to play an older title that you already own (and for some reason you don't own the original console anymore or its broken), you will pay to play it. This service is not for people who would not do that. Just like every other consumer product out there, you will not buy it if it doesn't appeal to you. Edit: Also, you have to understand that this service is still being developed and is in the very early stages. As with any technology or service, it can evolve and improve over time. The future may bring what everyone seems to be looking for but it has to start from somewhere.
@jimbobwahey: You shouldn't, but Playstation NOW has real cost associated with your access. How is Sony going to pay for them? Advertisement? Remember, Sony has to keep data-warehouses with specialized hardware close to you to achieve this. SO the costs are: 1. Technology research & development 2. Investment into datawarehouses or at least hardware in rented warehouses 3. Maintenaince cost 4. Data transport cost to end user Somehow this is supposed to be free? Even a paying Netflix user at $9 a month and over 30 million users, Netflix barely eeks out a profit. It is extremely low margin business. Basically, Sony hasn't told you what is bad about the service yet, but watch it. Two things will rear it's ugly head: a) terrible laggy experience due to latency intensive technology (i.e. think terrible multiplayer online and increase it, because of massive two way data communication) b) cost that Sony hasn't told you yet!
I don't care if you own physical copies of games, since the same thing happened with PSP and PS Vita and Sony stopped supporting those who bought UMDs,. Since then I only buy games digitally on any platform to avoid such problems and I can use the games tied to my account whenever and wherever I want. The bigger problem, that can be called even a treason (just like beginning to force PSN plus in order to play online on PS4, thus diminishing the nnumber of players) is not allowing peopple to streamplay they games they own digitally on PSN or the ones he got free from PSN Plus and then proposing extra fees for a separte service. Personally, I won't use the service if so, paying for games and PSN Plus is enough for me. Can anyone please confirm whther or not we can play at least the games we own digitally ? Thanks.
Then they should have gone with real backwards compatibility or a better solution. Why is it the customers burden or fault for wanting to use something they paid for? Besides, Sony said that making PS+ mandatory for online gaming on PS4 was so that they could use the money from subscription fees to improve their online service. So why have their customers got to pay a second subscription fee to play games they already own? It's ridiculous in my opinion. Just think as well, with the current push towards purchasing games digitally how much money you will have thrown down the drain when the PS5 is released and once again, you can't play your old games? If I buy digital music or movies, I can play them on a vast amount of devices, but once again the video game industry has to be "special" and stick it to the consumer, even though we pay much more money for games than we do movies/music. Then again, they seem to insist that we don't even own our games any more, and that we're simply purchasing a "license" to play them. It's crazy. Edit: @nukeitall Sony can pay with all the money they make from PS+ subscriptions. Remember, they went on record saying that the introduction of the mandatory fees for online play was to improve the service. This seems like an appropriate use of that money, doesn't it?
This could be good but completely depends on what games they have available. I had a feeling they would probably charge you regardless of if you had the disc or not, but that's why I've kept my PS3, PS2, and PSX. Now if they add games like Einhander, Maximo, Katamari Damacy, games that are hard to find or no way wants to go on to Ebay and $50 dollars again for, then this could work out. I just wonder if they are going to have any of the indie games avaliable that they had for the PS3...
As much as I love Sony, Playstation Now is pretty sketchy. I understand them charging a fee for backwards compatibility due to buying Gaikai for 380 million. From what I have heard, it is more like subscriptions and then paying additional fees to rent a game you already own. The problem is that I can easily click on the power button on my PS3 and play there, it doesn't matter. The whole point of Playstation Now is that it makes it more comfortable to play everything on the PS4. I hope Sony doesn't screw this shit up. @jimbobwahey "Then they should have gone with real backwards compatibility or a better solution." The problem with real backwards compatibility is the price of developing it for the PS4. The original PS3 could play PS2 games, however that raised the price of the console itself. "Besides, Sony said that making PS+ mandatory for online gaming on PS4 was so that they could use the money from subscription fees to improve their online service. So why have their customers got to pay a second subscription fee to play games they already own? It's ridiculous in my opinion." The whole point of PS+ is to attract more consumers to the console itself and the provided service. It is a form of advertisement and sales. Sony themselves are paying a heavy price for certain games to be available for free, such as Bioshock Infinite, DMC, Metal Gear Rising, etc. "Just think as well, with the current push towards purchasing games digitally how much money you will have thrown down the drain when the PS5 is released and once again, you can't play your old games?" I understand the frustration, and I myself want to be able to play my owned PS3 games for free on a PS4. If not, then it isn't hard to turn on the PS3 itself. "@nukeitall Sony can pay with all the money they make from PS+ subscriptions. Remember, they went on record saying that the introduction of the mandatory fees for online play was to improve the service. This seems like an appropriate use of that money, doesn't it?" Improve services like online connectivity and bringing free games to our subscription. Sony themselves have to make a profit for the subscription, because then there is no point of having one if they are losing out on cash. Sony themselves aren't doing financially well in their other divisions.
@jimbobwahey Are you willing to pay $600 for BC capable PS4? Due to PS3 cell processor being difficult to emulate, they would need to include the Cell/RSX for proper PS3 BC. Remember how people reacted to PS3 when first came out? As for fees I somewhat agree but based on costs involved can see if charge further. But I do think if you own the disc, you shouldn't pay to stream the game
@nukeitall The company Sony bought never had a problem with latency, they showed to be stable for game streaming even before Sony bought them out. Onlive had a little issue with that though, If I remember right. Plus if you have a connection that Sony suggests it will be even better. Besides, that is why they are going to have a large beta right? To work out the kinks... This sounds like a fantastic service to me, I would be willing to pay.
scott182, there's going to be latency, unless their server is going to predict what button I'm going to press.
@jimbobwahey, they technically aren't taking access away from something you own. You OWN THE DISC. When you buy a game, you aren't buying access to every media version of it that is ever made. When you buy a cross-platform game for the PS3, do you expect a free copy of it for the 360, too? I agree it would be nice if they'd give gamers who owned the game on disc free access, but the truth is that would be a massive feature/favor. EXPECTING them to do so is irrational as all hell.
You don't just "leave backwards compatibility out." Plus you're paying for the streaming of the game, not the game. You don't own the game. You own one disc copy of it. Try going to Netflix and tell them you own a DVD for a movie and you demand they stream it to you for free. lol Anyways, there are only two options: subscribe or rent. So it doesn't matter if you own some game, you have to subscribe to all of them at a flat rate anyway . If you have no knowledge of CS or EE whatsoever, your comments mean nothing so do not make them. Thank you!
@jimbob If you knew anything about the ps3's esoteric hardware and how it compares to the ps4 (ie, hardly at all) you'd know they would have practically had to include a ps3 in the unit as well. If you need proof, take a look at how fantastic ps3 emulation is on PCs... oh right. Personally never seen the problem with keeping your hardware and your games... and... well... there's absolutely zero added latency playing my ps3 games on my ps3, it doesn't need any kind of connection, it's just there and works. You bought the ps3 game with a license to use it in a ps3, nothing more. Sony have patented technology for adding trophies to games that were not originally designed with them. They're adding value to old games (OK, not for everyone, but for plenty of us). They're bringing a huge portion of the PS game library to people who won't even have to or have ever owned a PS console. That's big. Whining because Sony won't let you eat their bandwidth for a service you never paid for is pretty damn entitled. Take your ps3 game, stick it in a ps3 - that's what it's for, that's what we've been enjoying doing for 6 years now.
I think it is great for people who have switch from X360 to PS4 (like myself) but agree you should get a discount or something if you own the game already... that doesn't make sense to me that they would make avid PS3 supporters repurchase their games.
There's certainly no "good" to this situation, but who really expected Sony to do this? What company can afford to give people thousands of TBs of games for free because they purchased MGS2 12 years ago?
iif you already own the disc version, you probably already own the console to go with it, its not like someone is forcing you to buy the same game multiples times, its up to you to decide.
Why sell a game once when you can sell it twice. Easy money.
Well, its not good but its not bad either. Why would you need to stream something that you had a physical disc for? Everything I've heard of describes this as a subscription service like Netflix, which would allow you to access multiple titles rather than specific ones. Its not like you should have access to the stream for free for one particular title that you physically own, and not have to pay for the infrastructure that comes with the service. @jimbobwahey: So the paid Xbox Live subscription should come with a free access to stream every game in the Xbox 360 library? Of course not. Its a different service entirely. Why would you hold Playstation Now to a different standard?
@everyone who says that they should be able to stream the game they own for free. You already got what you paid for. You bought a game that was made for said system and that's it that is all that was promised to you. a game that would work on that system. So now you are asking for them to pay for the bandwidth and servers so you can play a game for free. If PlayStation now is going to work people are going to have to pay for it.
@jimbobwahey Hey i bought the xbox ver of GTAIII so i deserve a copy of GTAIII for Android or iOS right? when you purchase a game its for what ever platform it was designed for, you know that when you buy the game, just because you buy another device later on down the line does not mean you get free copy's of that game to play on another box. The fact that some games do get that benefit , does not mean all will. The games were made for a PS3 than that was what the game is made for when you buy it, you know its for that platform. wanting it on more than one platform is great, no argument there but like i said just because you buy another console does not mean you get your entire back catalog to run on the new one for free.
So users should be able to just stream and use the servers for free? I hate to defend Sony, but there's nothing shocking about this. Maybe a discount would be nice, but you people who expect free streaming for life are kinda clueless.
Why should Sony (or MS or Nintendo or Apple or any other media company) give their intellectual property away? No one complains when the movie companies charge you for "newer" versions of the same old movies. I can't tell you how many movies I've owned on VHS, DVD and the Bluray, with multiple versions of each -- Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, the Godfather, Disney classics, etc... The PS1, PS2 and PS3 eras are over and there is no obligation for Sony to allow us to use older formatted games on their new platforms... Gamers need to stop acting so entitled. Would I like to be able to use my PS2 and PS3 games on my PS4? Absolutely. Does Sony owe me that? No. I've bought the Beatles albums on vinyl, CDs and digitally. I never felt that Paul McCartney should give me the digital version of Sgt. Peppers just because I owned the vinyl album. If you don't want to buy a game you've already bought, then don't buy it.
@scott182: "@nukeitall The company Sony bought never had a problem with latency, they showed to be stable for game streaming even before Sony bought them out. Onlive had a little issue with that though, If I remember right." Really? Because if it was true, Gakai would be a godsend and worth gazillion more than what it was sold for to Sony for just the patents and technology. /sarcasm Bottom line is there is no technology that can fix the way the internet is purposely built for. The only solution, is to wait for the internet infrastructure to get faster. Why do you think a CDN exist and why every multiplayer internet experience is still laggy? So no! All the issues existed back then, still exist today. No magic pill, but a faster internet infrastructure!
I own a Blu Ray at home, so why can't I stream it for free on Amazon!?!?! I mean, this is really quite silly. If you already own the game, then play the game you own. People thing they should get a ton of games for free just because they own the disc?
My question is: Why would someone have the game disc but not the console to play it on? Why should you expect to be able to play your copy of Crash Bandicoot when you don't own a PS1 to play it on? Either way you don't get to play the game, so where is this huge problem suddenly popping up from? I love how people think BC has been this industry wide standard for years when it hasn't been. Nintendo didn't have a BC console until the Gamecube, Microsoft never had a full BC console ever (Xbox 360 was software emulation that worked for most, but not all, games), Sony had the PS2 and early PS3 consoles but people whined about the price so Sony removed non-essential parts and since they wanted people to buy new games, BC was a logical choice. Especially with how many "I never play PS2 games on my PS3 anyway" comments there were. But all of a sudden, BC is such an important feature. Really? Is it really important to you? Or is it that you sold your previous console to get a new console at launch and aren't satisfied with the launch titles you have and now are without older games to tide you over? This is why you keep older consoles until you literally have no further use for them. And if you're going to whine about "there's not enough space in my entertainment unit for all of these consoles" then either A)Get a bigger entertainment unit/organize it better, or B)Use the various wall mounts designed for gaming consoles and have near unlimited space. There are options out there people, you have no excuse to not use them.
I guess is good if you want to trools Playstation now. so is good for the trools. Sony should allow me to be able to play tlou on my PS4, bluray player through playstation now. not allowing it is stupid.
who ever thought that it would be free if you have the game on disc to begin with is delusional! there will be too many flaws in it. for instance, how would they know you own the disc? sure you might have played it and have trophies for it but how could they verify you still own it as the game disc itself has never been registered under your account? if they allow for free access as long as you have the disc, then you can simply rent, borrow and share the disc with multiple users. they will lose big time! PSNow is Netflix for games and Sony has made that intention clear since the beginning. it's good enough for them to allow multiple users play online on the PS4 as long as there is 1 account on that console has PS+ while all the other accounts just reap the benefits, but PSNow is a separate service. I don't understand why people are OK with Netflix, but when Sony does it, it's money grabbing! all I can say is, "Haters...haters everywhere!"
This is big picture. This isn't a program so that we can play the games that we own on a ps4. Its creating a library of past games that ppl will now have access to for a long time to come. I see only the good for us and Sony. Also, think of the ps+ bonuses we will get. I am happy. Think about it. If we could do that, we could buy any game we wanted for as little as we could find it and they would have to give us a digital copy for free.
Some of you sound like you are saying you should be able to stream Netflix for free if you own the digital movie already. You pay to use their data centers to stream to your device as a service (which apparently you think it's cheap), if you don't like that, purchase the old system and disc, then hook it up to your tv and play. And a side note: Yes, ps+ is required now, but they've already given you $80 in free games with the addition of don't starve.
I know Sony is providing the service, and people seem to be blaming them for not allowing this, but looking at it realistically, Sony is only able to offer it's own content in such a manner. They can not speak for every publisher and it is highly unlikely any publisher out there would want to give away a free digital version of a game, just because someone brought a retail copy some years ago. Proof of this comes from the fact that cross-buy is only available from a few Sony published games. You don't see EA, Ubi, Activision, or any other big or small publisher giving away free digital copies. The possibility being talked about here means the possible loss of hundreds of millions of dollars per year, as people can easily pick up cheap used games and possibly get them for a fraction of the price that a digital version would entail. Unless Sony offers some substantial payments to publishers to offer a subscription service such as this, it isn't likely to ever happen.
To me this seems like a great service... Depending on the price.
Is it really that hard to put your new super small PS4 right next to your Ps3. I know I do and is it really to hard to switch HDMI inputs on the little source selection button to play whatever console you feel like playing ATM. Backwards compatibility is always a huge plus along with a digital catalog of my ps3 games but people expect to damn much from a console that cost 399USD. How would that work anyways? Mail our game to Sony than they give you a code voucher to play it on their cloud system? Sony needs to make $ obviously, and if people want this feature its a choice. If not then oh well. I got all my consoles, the later models are slimmer and can fit in tighter spots so I don't have an issue.
How is this not good? I have an xone and i think PSnow is awesome. I think your looking at this the wrong way. PSnow is like netflix. Netflix doesn't give you copies of the movies you already own do they? You'll be getting all the old games you own plus ones you've never played so i don't see whats so bad.
My DVD players can't play my Blu-Ray Discs. Bohoo... Had you guys been all born on the 90 or what? BC was never a standard within the industry, stop crying about it, no one owns you nothing if you had choosen to sell your console.
they cant do it like that its an entire service. it would be like saying i own the dvds of breaking bad and the league and that i shouldnt have to pay for netflix because of that
It makes sense, you cant get ps2 or ps1 titles for free just because you owned the game in the past... they are offering the service of playing those games on a PS4, you can always undust your ps1,2,3 to play those games right?
As I expected it to be. Like they said, it's a rental service. You either rent a game individually or have a monthly subscription like Netflix with a bunch of games to play. Servers cost money to operate so it won't be free.
A B/C PS4 would probably cost $600 as someone mentioned. You know who killed proper B/C? The consumers. Those who complained and yelled and cried about how much the PS3 costed too much. Sony had no choice but to cut cost one way or another. Now I'm no advocate of a super expensive console, but I'm just saying that's the trade off. Sure it would have been nice to play PS3 games on the PS4, but I still keep my PS3 for that reason. If you are one of those people who buy a console to play old games, then Gaikai is the service for you.
I think a lot of people are failing to realize that when you pay for a physical game disc, it's no different than a digital copy in that you are NOT purchasing the game. You're purchasing usage rights. Ownership of the software and intellectual property rights are always retained by the game's creator. As part of of your purchase of usage rights are a laundry list of rules, terms, conditions, etc which you are required to follow. If you actually owned the software, you would be able to do whatever you want with it.
How could you prove you own the disc and still own it while they let you play it through playstation now? If they allowed it say through trophys in your profile then you could just borrow a friends game, get a trophy then you would get the game free on your profile. This makes perfect sense plus if you own the physical media why do you need playstation now? You obviously own the console.. If you don't then why you still own the discs anyway?
Yeah. So, bottom line, Sony is all about DRM and always on digital distribution, after all. There is just no way for the fanboys to contest this.
It was expected. Netflix pays money to stream content to you per GB. What do you think Playstation NOW will do? It will pay the same fee, except higher because Sony doesn't have the streaming scale of Netflix, nor does it have specialized hardware located in ISPs infrastructure placed closer to their users. This means there is impossible to offer you free access without incurring massive costs every time a user accesses the service? It was impossible for OnLive to sell you a game and offer access to it perpetually unless they kept growing faster than their cost would catch up to them. Basically, it is a failed business model. The only way to work it is if you pay for access per hour (that accounts for the streaming cost). My guess is Sony's overhead will be huge, and that cost has to pass to the consumer which in turn will turn them off.
Finally someone with a brain. Which is why i am now building a gaming pc. We all know (well not these dorks) sony and microsoft could have made their consoles play previous gen games they chose not too because they want to get rid of their hardware and didnt want all these kids selling their consoles screwing up their sales. So i prefer not to own every console ever made,. Ie gaming pc, controller, steam, and a torrent for shit games and emulators.
@nukeitall Yeah... this makes perfect sense. /s Sony will spend $380 million to acquire Gaikai, spend money to re-brand it as Playstation Now, spend money to market the new platform, spend money to include deals with other media companies (movies, television content), and then Sony will charge so much that they won't be able to sell subscriptions to the service that the spent hundreds of millions of dollars on so that they will lose hundreds of millions of dollars? Is that what you are saying?? In reality, Sony has to price the service to be commensurate with what consumers are willing to pay. Sony has shown over the last few years (culminating with the launch of the PS4) that they learned from their mistakes and have become extremely consumer focused. It is obviously Sony's goal to go beyond (BEYOND!!) its gaming consoles and expand to televisions, tablets, smart phones, PCs... To hit the "Mass Market"... This is the first foray into the streaming market on this scale (sorry, OnLive, it just wasn't happening) and Sony will take a hit (they have to), but their goal right now (is and should be) market share and becoming synonymous with game streaming, just as Netflix is with movies and television. This move allows them to tout the fact that people can potentially play any one of hundreds/thousands of games from Sony's vast library going back to the PS1. MS can't do that.
It's kind of weird for people to be upset by this. The cost of providing this streamed media was not part of the original retail purchasing price of your games. Running these servers will be expensive.People really need to stop feeling companies owe them when it comes to things like this, cause they really wouldn't be able to turn profit if they gave everything away while having to pay astronomical sums of money to keep those services up.
Ergh, nukeitall is so annoying. He just pops up in PlayStation articles just trying to spin negative crap. Christ boy.
It's neither good nor bad, it's expected and necessary. How are they to know you own the physical disk? How can they tell whether you've borrowed it or lent it to someone? Microsoft tried to fix that issue by making the disk useless after install, but we all know how well that went over with gamers.
Sony can do what they did with BF4 PS3 disc in PS4. Problem isn't verifying discs, but rather the cost associated with this. It is costly every time you access the game. Think anywhere from 1-5 GB of streamed data per hour of usage on top of tied up hardware time (yes, one system can only churn out so much usable time) so you do the math! There is no way there could ever be free access, unless they supplement it elsewhere. It is a failed business model to offer free access to existing games unless they account for it elsewhere. Money has to flow in for it to pay out and Sony is in no position to take heavy losses right now anywhere in the company to sustain a risky venture.
Whether cost is an issue will depend on how they intend to charge for the service. Even if they started bundling an activation code along with physical games that would give you access to the streamed version there would still be some sort of monthly/hourly fee required just for basic access. It's unlikely that you would ever get free unrestricted access to a streamed version of a game just by buying the physical copy.
Most likely so you can't loan out your physical copy then play the streaming version as well. And if you own a physical copy why would you want the downgraded visuals (the video that is streamed to you is compressed just like every other streaming service) and lag on input?
You pay the subscription no matter what. This is like saying you don't get a free streaming version of a movie you already own on Netflix. You either buy the subscription to have access to the service or you do not.
Considering I OWN the disc, I don't see it as being a big deal
Sony going to nickel and dime you all and laugh all the way to the bank while doing it.... I would rather have paid more for a version of ps4 that had hardware BC then pay for this laggy rip off. First having to pay for psn and now this crap? Glad I switched over to PC.
Me too! Respect. Got me a evga gx760 .not the best but hey its stronger than ps4& x1, i can upgrade it, and play my games that i own without double payinnnnn!
How exactly is this going to "nickel and dime" us?? This service is a gaming version of Netflix. Is Netflix "nickel and diming" us? What about Gamefly? Are they "nickel and diming" us? What about Amazon streaming? And when did backwards compatibility become something that we are entitled to? I don't remember being able to play my NES games on my SNES. Or my SNES games on my N64. Or my N64 games on my GameCube. You could only play GameCube games on the Wii. Only Wii games on the WiiU. So how is it that everyone thinks they are entitled to free versions of their old games on the PS4?? If you ask me this generation of Americans are a bunch of entitled cry babies.
And the PC gamer circle jerk begins!
Replace "Playstation" with "Xbox" and think about you just said.
How is the ability to stream games from Playstations extensive library of titles not a great idea???? People really expect this to be free?? you cheap bastards would never purchase another PS4 game if that was the case. Its an optional service like Netflix, I personally would cancel the hell out of Netflix and give these guys $8 month to play some classics!!!!!
Wait, So, I have to pay a subscription, then I have to pay for the games on top of that? Then, if I stop paying the subscription, I cant play the game that I paid for. That is an incredibly disgusting business model.
No that is not correct. From what I understand there are 4 options to the gamer. 1. You pay a monthly/yearly subscription fee to have access to the entire PS Now library "buffet" style and play whatever you want, whenever you want. 2.) You can rent games individually without the need for a subscription. Probably for a buck or two per rental. 3.) You can purchase titles individually without a subscription. They will be stored in the cloud and you can access them any time you want. 4.) You can ignore the whole thing, not pay a dime, and continue to play your PS3 titles on your PS3 system and your PS4 titles on your PS4 system.
Haha! I'll take that as a pretty funny joke.
What's the good side?
I don't see why you should get a copy. You get a digital copy, sell the disc, they've gave you a free copy of a game. If you were to buy a digital copy however, which binds to your account; that sounds better or more logical
Physical & Digital games are different. Just because you have a physical copy doesn't entitle you to a digital copy for free. What gets me is not being able to play all digital games that you have purchased for PS3 on PS4. I understand it's not backward compatible, but that should be for only physical games. Nintendo has the same problem, but at least it's only $1.50 to upgrade the digital game. Once it's been released on the Wii U VC though. They have the same games for the Wii U & 3DS, but you have to buy the game on each system to be able to play it on both systems. Years ago I always though Digital would be able to play on any device made by it's company, but that only seems to be true for everything except Video Games. I guess that's what happens when Video Games gross more money than Hollywood.
Why would you want a digital copy when you have the disc? Its obvious why they didnt give you the option, im just wondering why youd want it other than selling or giving away the disc. @PockyKing Oh, right. Too tired, not thinking clearly :P
What if you don't have a PS3 anymore cause you traded it to get the PS4?