It's not that PS Now is bad by any means. It's just far from ideal and alienates some users. Sony can fix that, though. How you might ask? By peeking over their green competitor's shoulder and doing a little creative copying of their homework.
What can they learn? How to overall devalue their new games/products. Why should they even bother considering when their system is selling better, more so world wide?
Devalue? It sure hasn't stopped State 2 or SoT. How would playing GoW on a service similar to Game Pass for Sony devalue the actual game? "Why should they even bother considering..." Because it's another option that would bring more opportunities for more gamers to play more games.
For one thing, Sony doesn't have MS's game quality issues. SoT and SoD2 aren't well regarded and arguably aren't even $60 games. What they are is multiplayer titles so something like GaaS benefits them. Makes them easy to access whereas a normally selling day one $60 SP title like Horizon or UC as offered through a $10 a month group game service isn't going to make production costs back anytime soon much less see a profit. Secondly, the "options" you're so currently hot on favors publishers, not consumers. Prices can be increased, MTs or just differing tiers of service could be introduced, as is happening with EA's. Also, where are the articles and/or reports showing that subscription game services are leading to increased console sales?
Godmars290 You clearly doesn't know anything about State of Decay 2.
Again you make no sense. I rented GoW and Horizon from Gamefly and those games did not devalue any less from if I would have bought them. There are plenty of other single player games on Game Pass and their gameplay hasn't devalued. And one of the biggest draws to Game Pass is creating a large community for State 2 and SoT or any other MP game that might come to it. How that is a devalue or a bad thing for gamers as you're implying is nonsense. "Horizon or UC as offered through a $10 a month group game service isn't going to make production costs back anytime soon much less see a profit." How do you know this? Especially when those same games are offered day one (or next) on rental services like Gamefly and Redbox? Not to mention they're still sold in retail and digital the same as State 2 and SoT? By the way wasn't State 2 the number one game sold in NPD in May, they only track physical sales not digital or Game Pass. So where is this devalue? "Secondly, the "options" you're so currently hot on favors publishers, not consumers. Prices can be increased, MTs or just differing tiers of service could be introduced, as is happening with EA's." MT's are offered regardless on how you played the game, rented or purchased. And once again there is the option to actually buy the game and not rent it from any service. The services do favor the consumer because instead of paying $60 for a game they can actually try it for $10 (or whatever) and if they don't like it, they can try something else from a a wide variety that service offers. "Also, where are the articles and/or reports showing that subscription game services are leading to increased console sales?" That's a good question, I was going to ask you where are the articles saying that subscriptions are devaluing consoles sales? Because as of now there are many and all types of subscription services and other ways to rent games but they don't seem to be impacting actual sales of games.
As popular as they are Gamegly and Redbox still aren't as common, or as accessible, as a direct over-online service from Sony or MS. Are still limited by physical copies and the number of those copies available along with mail and travel times. Its because of those limitations that game sales aren't notably impacted. Unlike used game sales, which also involved the likes of Gamestop breaking the seal on day-one titles and offering them as used - because it made them more money. And no, as someone likely happy with a generic white box with "GAME" slapped on it, you have no idea were I'm coming from or talking about...
Lol, why am I not surprised that you would use gamefly instead of supporting the developers...
Well, for one, Game Pass shows that a subscription service doesn't need to be done through streaming. PS Now would be a much more compelling service if you could choose to download the PS4 games rather than only streaming them. And Microsoft could also learn from PS Now. Downloading games will always offer a better experience, but there's also convenience in being able to stream those games to your older laptop. Both services can benefit by looking at what works for the competition. That's how services get better.
I'm still not seeing how these games would be devalued. Positive that Redbox and Gamefly (here in the states) are common, as these services pretty much killed their retail counterparts. And you act like Gamefly takes months to receive a game. I got GoW two days later after it's release. These services are not hampering sales as you stated. Even used games from GameStop are not stopping record breaking sales on excellent games that have been released this gen. And for all we know maybe Game Pass has a similar set up like Spotify. That every time a user dl's a game that developer gets a payment. For all we know they could be getting a good amount of money on top of sales from physical and digital. But, if you personally would rather Sony not make a service like Game Pass where you could access their library and also play thier new first party games day one, but instead prefer to just pay $60 a pop for individual games then more power to you.
The day or days it takes Gamefly to send a game - that's available if not all of their copies are already out - doesn't feel like months when you want it NOW? And Netflix killed the likes of Blockbuster who also rented games along with movies. Redbox more than Gamefly just packed more dirt on the grave. "I'm still not seeing how these games would be devalued." That's cause you want COD and Madden, where I wanted a version of White Knight Chronicles with complex combo combat mechanics and a engagingly deep story instead of the poor PSO clone with a tacked on shallow story that we got.
Perhaps he's not really describing it correctly. A Quote from DA-ROOSTER (a Xbox fanboy to the extreme) "Xbox fans can easily play this game for $10 on Xbox GamePass or buy it for $30 it's no fuss or big deal" Perhaps what MS wanted from Xbox gamers "no fuss or big deal if a game is average It's only $10!" MS will have gamers settling with average games like SOT, and SoD2 because it's only $10 an month. In turn watering down high quality developed games, and ending up more like Andriod or IOS marketplace. Time will tell. Perhaps that's what he means?
"MS will have gamers settling with average games like SOT, and SoD2 because it's only $10 an month. In turn watering down high quality developed games, and ending up more like Andriod or IOS marketplace." Thank you for getting it in one. You got it in one, right? Been - trying to - explain it to the other guy, but its only been an exercise in frustration. Physical rentals especially.
Ooooh, so basically using one game that was already a budget title and then applying it to everything that MIGHT happen with Game Pass or a Game Pass s rental service. Even though quality games have already appeared on it as well as EA's service. And throughout time during being able to rent games. And then taking one comment from an XxXtreme fan (I'm guessing from YouTube) who is also making a broad sweep of an opinion to try and prove a point. All the while never proving what was meant by saying "devalue". But even still, would that happen with Sony? Would Sony start making $10 single player, cinematic, emotional, Triple A experiences because their games would be on a service like Game Pass? Got it.
How about this, Gangsta: Instead of using Gamefly or Redbox, you actually SUPPORT the developers who spent years making these games??
Well, they can embrace the future or fall into the past. By past, I mean get caught up in their arrogance like they did when building and launching the PS3. The start of next gen could signal another 360/PS3 era war if MS continues to push the gaming front and Sony continues to fall behind with the services and features they offer.
How is Microsoft "continuing to push the gaming front" by releasing terrible games like Sea of Thieves and SoD2? It looks especially bad considering that Sony is ACTUALLY pushing the gaming front with GOTY quality titles like God of War.
@Bigger Boss MS doubled their studios, which they said at E3 was only the start of their studio acquisitions and that their goal was to be the best 1st party publisher in the industry (See how they started pushing but haven't finished yet? Figured I'd spell it out for you so your simple mind MIGHT understand). Seriously, dude, you guys were the ones after E3 saying that their acquisitions wouldn't matter this gen because the studios wouldn't publish games until the start of the next generation... yet I mention them pushing out games at the start of next generation and you're moving the goalposts again? What a joke! Not to mention that the reviews meant nothing for the success of either Sot or SoD2... but you just keep on being ignorant because I could use the laughs!
" the start of their studio acquisitions and that their goal was to be the best 1st party publisher in the industry (See how they started pushing but haven't finished yet?)" See how they've yet to deliver on anything yet?
LOL I expected nothing else from the sheep of GAAS propaganda from MS! services are more important than great games, now? talking like a true corporate shill! what's so great about services offered by MS compared to Sony right now? xbox fanboys are bragging about gamepass like it's some free service that the PS doesn't offer. funny because last I checked, you have to pay a subscription for it as in renting those games. XBGL Gold alone is not enough, ha? on top of that, there are also EA Access which is another thing that the xbox fanboys are so proud of. another subscription! seriously, you guys can go to hell with your beloved subscriptions. PS only users are still pretty mad that this gen we have to pay for multiplayer no thanks to XBL Gold! but at least Sony is not locking F2P games like Fortnite behind paywall like MS! and to conceal that fact, MS are pushing hard the cross-play agenda and the xbox sheep fall for it while being the only platform where you have to pay to play Fortnite - the most popular game at the moment! dick move from MS but their fanboys love it getting rammed from behind by that slimy stick!
"MS doubled their studios" Cute, of those 5 new studios 2 were already only making Xbox exclusives, 2 others were already making games for Xbox as well even tho they were multiplat. Without extending any of these 4 studios the number of games Xbox gets will be the same from them. Only the 5th studio is a new one which will ensure the Xbox will get more games than before...
@Godmars "See how they've yet to deliver on anything yet?" Yes, I do. They announced the studios and their commitment at E3... LESS THAN A MONTH AGO. This is why people like you an Bigger Boss are ignorant trolls and not worthy of rational responses anymore. You know better but you choose to be stupid. @ aenea Cute? LOL! Only thing cute I see is the brotherhood of ignorance you Sony fanboys share around here!!! 6 studios: Playgrounds second and the Initiative are brand new Compulsion and Ninja Theory are making exclusives now so Sony/Nintendo lose 3rd party support Playground and Undead Labs could have made multiplats and MS was wise to acquire them That's 4 studios that are making exclusive content for MS now and two studios that cannot choose to go multiplat, and there's still more acquisitions coming in the future. What's the matter, buddy, math not your strong suit? No? That's right! Trolling is, LOL!!!
"They announced the studios and their commitment at E3... LESS THAN A MONTH AGO." Thing is they've made, and failed to live up to, such commencements at many E3s. Whether Xbox fans acknowledge it or not, they have a bad reputation they need to dig out of. Yet here are doing to old round-and-round about how Sony's the one who needs to do get in gear against MS.
@ godmars It is a round and round. It seems the guys that are on top always get arrogant and screw things up (even Nintendo did it when they sold the Wii), then have to scramble to get it right again when they lose their grip on the lead when they forget certain aspects of their business/customer relationships. As an Xbox gamer, it never makes sense to me to think that MS cut studios in the middle of last gen and didn't decide to get more until a decade later. MS has a lot of potential again though; a potential first realized by the fact that the OG Xbox didn't fail against the Sony juggernaut; MS had software diversity and studios to produce quantity then and they took everyone by surprise with the success of the 360 launch too because they had quantity and diversity. Fast forward to today, and Sony has a similar margin of success to that of the Xbox/PS2 days and a similar level of arrogance and close-mindedness is again developing, while MS has the quantity of studios they need in order to try and compete again... IF Sony doesn't recognize this and course correct, and IF MS holds true to their commitment, then as my OP suggested the start of next gen could signal another 360/PS3 era war.
But nobody gaming on PlayStation is concerned with services or GaaS or anything like that, isn't that right? Nobody wants digital games, because they want to "own" all their purchases. So how would having the OPTION of how you purchase or play your games devalue anything that you choose to spend your money on? Hell, PlayStation themselves said they didn't offer EA Access because they didn't feel it offered value to the consumers. THEY made the decision to take that decision away from us, and every single day on here, the same people regurgitate the rhetoric. It's like there's so many great studios in-house that produce so many great single player games, that they're not looking at other areas where their platform could extend it's dominance.
"...where I wanted a version of White Knight Chronicles with complex combo combat mechanics and a engagingly deep story instead of the poor PSO clone with a tacked on shallow story that we got." And that happened because Game Pass devalued those games right? I think you're desperately trying to paint a picture of Game Pass destroying single player games. Your frustration on what you believe GaaS is has nothing to do with the points you brought up and or Sony offering a Game Pass service. There would be nothing devalued if Sony had a Game Pass equivalent and offered their games on that service day one. As I mentioned you can already rent their games from other services and whether you get it on day one or day three (like me) or day five hundred, you can still rent these games and they will have the same value as they did if you purchased it day one. "Blockbuster who also rented games along with movies" Interesting point...Blockbuster also rented games back then that you could get instantly and NOW. And yet the games they rented didn't devalue at all. Again, you're not really proving any points or facts by saying a Game Pass service for Sony would devalue their games. It seems you're more upset at MT's in games and games that don't exactly fit what you personally want (like WNC) more than anything else. But that has nothing to do with Sony offering a rental service similar to Game Pass.
The more you reply, decrying how I'm talking nonsense, the more you show that you don't understand the issue of quantity versus quality. That if you get games-games-games-games-games for the sake of games, especially from one publisher, games that are good, games that are honestly enjoyable is going to be harder to find much less make. There will be less reason to make them or a publisher to back them. Mandates will be imposed to get the most money out of a title rather than engagement. WNC is a relevant example because it was compromised to get it out within the PS3's launch window, just as ME3 became a compromised example of DLC, or SoT and SoD2 for them being first offerings for GaaS, yet low on content and/or buggy. Not that I expect you to understand any of that... "Blockbuster also rented games back then that you could get instantly and NOW." ...? Because store locations had unlimited shelf space with infinite copies of games that never ran out? What?
"That if you get games-games-games-games-games for the sake of games, especially from one publisher, games that are good, games that are honestly enjoyable is going to be harder to find much less make." How? Where? What are you basing this on? You are doing nothing but making up extreme hypothetical scenarios on what you think might happen. Why would they be much harder to make when I have already pointed out that they're also being sold physically? EA has a subscription service and they still make quality games. We already have a market place that is filled with games-games-games-games-games, and the quantity definitely already outweighs the quality. But one man's garbage is another man's treasure. How does a rental service change something that's already there for retail? Do you think Sony games would not be quality if they offered a Game Pass service and their games day one? "There will be less reason to make them or a publisher to back them." What? That makes no sense, if by some chance this were to happen then customers would cancel their subscriptions. And then that service would fail and that dev would be ruined and close their doors. But this has not happened even with rental being around for decades. Are we still even talking about a Game Pass service? I feel like you're trying to make points that have nothing to do with anything of relevance anymore. "WNC is a relevant example because it was compromised to get it out within the PS3's launch window, just as ME3 became a compromised example of DLC, or SoT and SoD2 for them being first offerings for GaaS, yet low on content and/or buggy." WNC has nothing to do with a Game Pass like service, if it compromised because of wanting to be at launch then what does that have to do with Game Pass? ME3 has nothing to do with a Game Pass like service. SoT was released with low content and again it has nothing to do with Game Pass. State 2 was released with issues but all those issues were fixed in the first week of launch just like most every game this gen. None of this has anything to do with Game Pass or devaluing games. "Because store locations had unlimited shelf space with infinite copies of games that never ran out?" So Gamestop and other retail shops have infinite numbers of games that never run out? What points are you trying to make? You claimed a service like Game Pass for Sony would **devalue** games but renting games have been around since Blockbuster has been around. And none of the games during that time were devalued. You then start going on about MT's and GaaS but that has nothing to do with Game Pass and it definitely doesn't have anything to do with Sony providing a similar service. It definitely doesn't have anything to do with Sony offering downloads instead of streaming for their PSNow service. You then bring up WNC and ME3 for some reason. What those games have anything to do with Game Pass or renting games is beyond me. Unless you can prove that WNC and ME3 were compromised because of rental services then maybe you might have a point.
PS Now does not equal PS4 and insinuating that PS Now has the userbase of the PS4 along with a flawless product for everyone is absurd
??? Whee did you get that? PS Now was suppose to be a cross-platform service for consoles, smart TV, DVRs and the like. It failed, was scaled back only to consoles and seemed pretty much forgotten. Likely would have been shut down only here comes MS doing the same thing only differently and including day-one releases besides. Seem intent on making it the primary way to get all games from them where Sony wanted a paid BC service.
It’s like a game collection you get instantly. If only Sony had thought of this instant game collection idea first...
If only MS had thought about Games with Gold first...we can go back and forth with this all day.
i think he was taking the piss as PS now was out longer then game pass :/
"It's not that PS Now is bad by any means." Oh, it's bad. Just call it like it is. It's very bad.
You want to know how I can tell that you've never used PS Now before in your life?
You're so right! Let's go over all the great features: Lag, poor resolution, no 5.1 audio, no voice chat, missing game modes, ALWAYS ONLINE...
@TheCommentator Of course it is always online, captain obvious! There is no such thing as offline game streaming. HELLO?!?!
@letsa_go Hello! I'm guessing you're a relative of the goldfish (judging by your memory)? Back at the start of this gen, MS was ripped to pieces for ALWAYS ONLINE... And FYI, Game Pass has ZERO of these problems.
@TheCommentator Ok, which new Xbox exclusives on GamePass can be played offline?
What Microsoft can learn from Sony about gaming.
Not interested. I like the buy the game I want, wait for psplus for games I did not buy. I do not need another monthly fee that will go up over time and could hinder quality games from releasing currently. I understand the “option”... but the one that has the “option” does not have many quality options. Is it because Microsoft wants monthly billing more than anything else. I mean, Xbox live, Xbox game pass, ea access, micro transactions, dlc, loot boxes... how much money does one have to spend every month and for a company that has spent the last 6/8 years not trying? I pay to play online, and I pay to play top tier exclusives. I’m good. Of course, I’m old school where demos were released to help push sales and games.. now they hide demos behind paywalls and the old reason they did not release a demo was because the quality was bad and would have hurt sales. I get it, you can play the whole game, but you still have to purchase everything to put into said games. No thank you.
All Sony needs to do is make it so the games are downloaded right to the PS4 instead of streaming lower the price of or do special deals for PSNow like Microsoft does with the Game Pass make PSNow not as clunky and bring new day one released games to PSNow.
What microsoft can learn from sony about getting more consoles into the home. How bout that
So in other words... What Sony can learn from the competitor that is last in the market and loosing miserably against them? Why should Sony copy a business model of the competitor that is loosing? It is working for them? Is game pass making a bang! In Xbox situation? Is doing NOTHING!!!! Playstation is #1 and is not by begging others for cross play or copying others business models.
Sony needs to improve PS Now’s pricing
At least offering the yearly subscription option in other regions (UK) that USA gets, I think it's $99 in USA for one year whereas it's only available at about $17 per month in UK. Although US is $20 per month, it's clear it's trying to get you to get the longer subscriptions. And offering the same games across the regions would be nice to. US and UK have different library's, like Netflix) whereas Gampass is the same across regions. I saw on here that Yakuza 3, 4 and 5 where on PSNow and I wanted to try them only to find that they were only available in the US PSNow.
Don’t make sucky games
As others have said, it would devalue $60 dollar single player games if it launched day and date of release on a service. It would work if it's a free to play game. Or cheap, online, multiplayer games with micro transactions, dlc and things like loot boxes to make up for production costs. You won't see $200 million dollar games like Red Dead Redemption 2 or GTA 6 on that service at launch. It would be ridiculous. Might as well throw your money in a furnace as a developer. Secondly, Microsoft is hiding the fact that you're paying to demo games with no ownership. No value. Even if they discount the game, you're still buying a virtual file that you can't sell. Which is what Microsoft originally wanted to do anyway. Which is to cut into and kill used game sales. Their plan hasn't changed. Just as EA wants to kill used game sales as well. They haven't changed. They just repackaged the idea of no trade in value or used games. And paying to demo games you will never own physically. With multiplayer eventually dying and your game being worth nothing.
That when they only have crap games, they can rent them for $ 10 a month and the public will pay for it...?
Make that elusive monthly rate of $9.99 a regular option ala Netflix. People might not like paying over $100 at once, being locked in. Actually advertise it/push it to the forefront as a service. Rotating PS1/PS2/PS3 games through PS+ for example would get ppl talking about the service, well, every month. Free month with new PS4s? Pad console sale incentives without bundles. Prize codes.
They can evolve PS Now or whatever the streaming service is into something comparable. Especially since theyre adding the download option. PS1-current gen options would be killer. Theres so many games ive never tried but heard a lot about. Add some MP features/trophies and theyll have something really cool. Still buying physical copies of must have games tho
Any time I click on a link and this website opens, I immediately close it. Trash site, trash writers and the stupid ads all through the page make it one of then worst sites around, I know, I should look at the web address below the link but I'm both lazy and stupid.
They can learn that they don't need Game pass, because PS4 gamers are willing to pay a subscription fee just for BC with PS1, PS2 and PS3 games, and they don't care about anything but Sony exclusives anyway! They don't even care about crossplat play, because no one plays games outside of the Greatness that is the PS4. Obviously not caring about this stuff is what the gamer peoples want, because Sony! Sony 4evr, w00w00! /s
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.