Sony could lose its lead in games as it did with memory storage cards and high-definition DVDs.
Okay whatever, but the writer is not aware that a separate PS Plus subscription is not required for multiplayer for PS Now members.
I never knew this, why did i never know! Damn lol.
@oneyedsteve don't feel bad i didn't know either
Price cut must mean its not selling well. They want some of what Xbox Game Pass is already making. Inferior streaming service should be cut in half, it's the only way the Sony cult will be able to compete.
Price cut could mean it's not selling well, but it could also mean they're getting competitive on that front.
Price cut could mean they want to maintain market share in a market that is about to have two brand new competitors which are directly competing with them also. If it wasn't selling well, then that is telling of the market, not the service. If Sony couldn't make it sell well without competition, then how can three companies expect to compete in a limited market and make money? It's not like Sony is some upstart rowing against the tide to get noticed, and that's why it isn't selling. They are one of the most powerful brands in gaming. Doesn't matter if the new services may be better, or even a better value, I'd expect if this kind of service was actually in demand, then it'd be selling well if they're the only one offering a service. Their service doesn't completely suck like some people say it does, and people streaming games aren't the one's that care so much about all the bells and whistles like graphics fidelity, or low lag times.
Don't get me wrong I'm not being a PS fanboy but even though xbox game pass offers some newer games as a turn based rpg slave I can't put gamepass up with psnow because there are plenty of turn based games on psnow. xbox game pass not so much. I'm sure there are millions of us rpg addicts.
Looks like Microsoft studied how people where not jumping in mass on psnow and took advantage of the knowledge of seeing the complaint of the price you get. Sony knew they where doing that. Sony saw the day gamepass launched and should have acted WAY sooner than now. I hope they have more of a plan to make more games available. And make PSnow better than game pass. Just like they made PS+ better than xbox gold.
Wait, if I have PSNow I can play games online? What if I buy a disk game and own a game like CoD? Can I play that online with PSNow?
CoD is not there in PSNow. What he said only applies to games that are in PSNow.
What's common sense say like really
Well, fuck Sony then..
But what he is saying is they should bundle both together. PS+ offers much more than just online play, so Sony should have a bundle like the GamePass Ultimate. Maybe call it PSNow Platinum or something.
just to make things clear so I'm not missing anything...now if I have ps now membership I can play any multiplayer title even if it's not in the Ps now games?? for example I can play The Division 2 with no Psnow?
No. PSNow offers online play only for the games in its service. Any game not in PSNow, that has online play (and is NOT a Free 2 Play game), would still require PS+. If you wanted to play online of course.
NO. PS Now doesn't replace PS Plus. You can play the multiplayer games within PS Now.
No. Only the games on PS Now and Free to Play games don't need Plus for Multiplayer.
Truth is that there wasn't a paid requirement for PS3. So it would be pretty shitty if they made you pay to play those games in PS Now...
And that the exclusives on there cannot be found on anything other than a Playstation.
You need to subscribe to both XBL and GamePass in order to play GamePass games online? That's ridiculous. No wonder XBox division makes money even with awful sales, they milk their fans like dairy cows.
“Yet if loyal consumers want both access to the deepest catalog of games, and interactive features and other benefits, they shouldn’t be forced to shell out twice. Instead of milking customers, Sony would be better served by either folding Now and Plus into one service or offering a steep discount to have both.” What like Xbox Game Pass Ultimate? That $15 a month price model adds up to $180 a year, which is the same exact price that you’d be paying if you annually bought Xbox Live Gold($60) & Xbox Game Pass($120). There’s no savings in that standard pricing for the monthly combined service, although luckily they’re now giving away Spotify Premium to sweeten the deal. Now that PlayStation Plus & PlayStation Now both cost $60 each annually, you can get both services for $120 a year which is $60 cheaper annually than the annual cost of Xbox Game Pass Ultimate. That basically equals to $10 a month for both services, which is the same amount that Sony just price dropped PS Now’s monthly cost to as well as price matching how much Xbox Game Pass & Stadia cost monthly. Idk how you can complain about PS Now’s pricing in conjunction with PS+ when for the same price of the rival game subscription services individually you can get two services for the equivalent price of essentially $10 monthly. Unless Sony had a $100 a year model for both services, which would then be $8.33 a month, it’s literally impossible for Sony to offer a better deal when what’s already now available for their consumers is already a better deal than most other game subscription services by themselves.
You drove that point to the Earth's core. This article is baseless.
How the press and some people can eagerly turn this customer friendly move from Sony into a negative is beyond me.
OB1, They dont give two shits about us, dont fool yourself. All this price cut was a move to keep their existing customers and to lure more in in light of MS's and Googles up coming competition. I know its in gamers benefit, in the end, but I can assure you no suit wanted this "friendly move" to happen.
Hey I know it's all good business like all 'customer friendly' moves are haha It's still called customer friendly in that its, well , good for customers. I call things the way they are haha Edit I dont even care about cloud gaming but this negative reaction is very suspicious haha
not if you are smart about it, I got the best deal, I got nearly 3 years of gamespass ultimate, which includes gold and playable on PC for like 150$. they had a deal where you sign up and it converts your gold to gamespass ultimate, up to 3 years. futhermore you can get deals frequently and complete quests for gamespass. and now I have over 2 years to stack up on other deals, just got another free week from a pop tart box, lol.
When making comparisons, especially in an attempt to defame or devalue something, it's usually prudent to go with official prices. I could easily come up with any number of ways I've gotten PS+ cheap, or how I've used PSNow for free, but it wouldn't change the arguments about what intent there is from the service providers themselves. Not that the arguments made by the author are actually valid when you look at the overall pricing of the two services, or even the fact that the two services aren't the same or equitable, as MS has another service which is supposed to compete against what the author is saying Sony needs to do something about, and as of now, there is no indication about what the pricing model of MS new service will be, or if it'll be included in some way with game pass. MS could very well end up having a rather expensive monthly plan to get all the services, which Sony right now is only charging like $120 a year for all the same services which are already bundled somewhat in ways that MS is doing with Game Pass.
@rainslacker you are free to look at it anyway you want, but for me, i look at real world scenarios for legitimate prices and deals. Unfortunately since launch I've not seen any deal that has come close to the deals on xbox games pass on psnow for ps4, there just hasn't been. I'm not defaming anything, I just am a very practical person and look out for my bottom line. As for what the future holds who knows, but I'm constantly evaluating and will change paths when it is in my best interest.
You are forgetting that Ultimate includes Gamepass PC (it's also 9$ but 5$ at the moment tks to beta phase).
Em...PS Now is cheaper, way cheaper. You DON'T NEED a PS+ sub to play PS Now games online if you are subscribed to PS Now ( Of course, PS4 games which aren't on PS Now, you'll need a PS+ sub. ) unlike Gamepass only sub. you'll need an XBL sub. to play online.
I don't think that people realize that Sony's console, and games on it, isn't the same thing as PSNow. PSNow is a supplemental service to consoles, but also it's own thing, and by being it's own thing, it has it's own rules. One of those rules is that no PS+ is required for online play of the games on the system. But you are right by pointing out the logical errors in the authors argument. You were wrong to assume that journalists care about such logical extrapolation and conclusions....or are even capable of such things. I'll also throw in there that PSNow, is not the same as game pass. Similar, but different. MS has xCloud coming to go against PSNow, and as of yet, there is no say on if it will be included in the GP pricing model of any tier, or if it too will have it's own pricing tier. Last I saw, and if I recall correctly, what Sony calls remote play, which MS will offer, will be locked behind xCloud. I'm not even sure if Sony locks remote play behind PS+, but if they do, then fair enough.
I think the big point is the fact that you can get exclusives, multiplats, and online for 60$ a year which is massive. Of course I assume that EA, Ubisoft, and other subscription models from publishers may start to remove their games from other sub models like PSnow and GamePass.
I got 2 years of Game Pass Ultimate free because of all the Xbox Rewards points I had accumulated just by buying a few games online, getting achievements and a doing some 2 minute surveys about Xbox online. Hell of a deal.
Why would anyone ever pay more than $1/month for GamePass? O_o
This author doesn’t seem to take into account that what separates PlayStation Now from other game subscription services is that it also offers quarterly and annual models instead of just solely monthly plans like every other similar service. Xbox Game Pass & Stadia: $10 monthly PlayStation Now: $10 monthly Uplay+: $15 monthly Xbox Game Pass & Stadia: $30 monthly PlayStation Now: $25 monthly Uplay+: $45 monthly Xbox Game Pass & Stadia: $120 annually PlayStation Now: $60 annually Uplay+: $180 annually PS Now has a better price structure for long term subscribers than its competition. At $60 a year it’s basically the same price that Apple Arcade would be annually.
Xbox games pass ULTIMATE for3 years: as low as 150$ total. spend your money wisely and take advantage of deals.
And same goes for PS Now or PS+, you can always find deals on Black Friday or such (I never pay full price for PS+). But the regular price structure is set up in PS Now's favor.
@rdgneoz u can find deals on regular psn but there isn't any rewards or combo discount with psnow like 3 years for 150, if u see something like that for psnow & psplus, let me know id jump on it.
The 3 year game pass is a limited promotion, that currently doesn't have an end date, also if you have any current time on your XBL account you can only add an additional 2 years to it, because there's a hard wall for stacking only up to 3 years of gold. Still a good deal.
Xbox Game Pass Ultimate 6 months subscription is always on sale for about $30
xbox gamespass every couple of weeks has had a great deal, a friend of mine has only spent 3$ and has had it for about 6 months or so.
"PS Now has a better price structure for long term subscribers than its competition" That is correct. But if we strictly were to talk about content, it doesn't.
You sure?, one has over 800 games the other has over 200... gamepass does get some newer games though, that's a plus for gamepass, but content wise plus has over 4 times the game count and allows you to download ps2 and 4 games on top of streaming everything. I don't have a now sub as I don't like streaming games, I do sub to gamepass though, but content wise is also in news favour.
Good to see these discussions on Sony having a better price structure for their services than others. There's just so much irony here that may lead to hemochromatosis.
I don't see Sony bragging about measly 3 mil players after their biggest game in years launch for $2 a month. But you, do you...
@Finch So do you just comment with whatever random defense that pops in your head or do you actually look at the discussion and just throw a hail Mary?
Didn't Sony always have better pricing for PS+ than MS has for game pass? Or the yearly sub was the same or something? Didn't the recent changes make the pricing structure better? Or are we still talking about the original PSNow, which was a a la carte rental model? Why are we comparing two different services anyways? Why not compare xCloud and PS+? Because we can't right now? Or are we assuming xCloud will be included in the Game Pass current price structure? Will game pass games be available on xCloud for free? Will those games not on game pass be another sub for xCloud, or just another premium surcharge? Will MS go the paid per play route that Sony originally did with PSNow, or offer buy options like Stadia is doing? What will all those options cost? Every comment I've seen from people who actually know what PSNow has to offer is that PSNow has always been better on price when you look at MSRP. It's the people who are getting it on these really cheap promos who say that Game Pass has more to offer. yet, Sony still has more games on their service, now offers the download feature on PS4 games, and doesn't charge for a premium service to get it on two different platforms....again, comparing it to Game Pass. They don't require you buy a separate console related service to use features that are paywall locked on the console. Game Pass has it's own benefits over PSNow, and I have always said that at some of the prices they've had for the service, it's a damn good deal. But I wouldn't expect either company to continue to be able to operate those services at those prices indefinitely. If we're going to compare, then at least lets keep the metrics equitable.
@Rainslacker "Didn't Sony always have better pricing for PS+ than MS has for game pass?" Not they actually didn't, MS has always had deals that included Live and Game Pass included, not to mention signing up for GP for a dollar or having a couple of months free trial. It's only now that Sony has lowered their entry price point for PSNow that it's looking to be a deal for anyone who wants to subscribe. There aren't too many people who talked about PSnow because the price was too high, the streaming is in 720p and it's very laggy and the games offered were not desirable. This is why we have seen more comments and praise for Game Pass even if it's less games than PSNow. More games available doesn't mean there's more quality to choose from, unlike Game Pass where they have been adding a lot of good, quality games monthly. No need to get all defensive, I like the fact that now the discussion is which services are now cheaper when before is was "down with all services".
No one is going to complain that gangsta is referring to people getting hemochromatosis even though it's hereditary? All you going to do is complain about his opinion and not his abuse of facts? I swear. As far as PSNow, I'll start caring about the new price when they start streaming at at least 1080p. 720p would have been perfect for mobile stuff, but on PS4/PS5/PC, it makes no sense to be stuck at 720p.
***You talk up gamepass on a regular basis which has no streaming at all but the reason PSNow isn't good enough is because it only has 720p streaming?*** 1. No I don't. The only reason I even have game pass is because Microsoft offered to convert the entirety of my XBL to game pass ultimate for $1 more. Why wouldn't I do that? And also why I argue the value of the service is higher since it is dirt cheap at times now. 2. 720p is a problem for a streaming-focused service. My phones aren't even 720p, let alone my tablets, laptops, TVs, etc. I'm certain they have plans to upgrade it, but right now they are a max of 720p. ***I feel like there is a lot of pretend Sony support.*** I don't think anything about me is pretending. You can check out my profile here: https://psnprofiles.com/Lok...
The author didn't take much of anything into account. This article is a trainwreck of bad research.
What the author AND people in these comments fail to consider are actual games. The price differences are nothing huge this way or the other, but PS Now's game library pales in comparison to Gamepass. I can guarantee I'll be getting blind disagrees, but just look at the list of games from THIS year on Gamepass compared PS Now. You simply can't deny the value. PS Now has improved for sure, and the cloud streaming is a plus but the selection of games is most important thing when determining value. I have no reason to invest in it, I would much rather invest in the PS exclusives and I'm pretty others are doing the same which is why it's not super successful. Sony is never going to put their recent exclusives on there because they don't need to and it doesn't align with their strategy. MS for all its lack of exclusives is able to provide so much more value for money simply because of their situation and strategy.
Gamepass has had way better games
^what I thought, blind fanboy disagrees because people can't handle a little objective discussion that puts their favourite piece of plastic in any negative light.
1. UPlay+ subscription model is insanely overpriced. I hope it fails hard. 2. PSNow is still only 720p. Their $60/year pricing is fair at that, it will be competitive when they do at least 1080p if not 4k. 3. Game Pass isn't really comparable as it's non-streaming, a much better deal, IMHO, than full on streaming. Though, it will likely have a constantly smaller game selection because of that. 4. Stadia pricing doesn't include price of games. Most games you'll still have to buy. In fact, UPlay+ would be ON TOP of the $120 annual Stadia price. I'd put the best value hierarchy as such right now (YMMV): Game Pass > PS Now >> Stadia >>>>>>> UPlay+
- Where does Ubisoft get off charging that much for a service that will primarily only carry Ubisoft titles? - You know how expensive 4K streaming would be? That’d eat through so much of people’s data plans. 1080p is more reasonable. - PS Now also offers a large slew of downloadable games and what’s available for download is larger there than on the entirety of Game Pass. - I really don’t know who’d get Stadia over an actual console since you’d pay way more for that that subscription service than you ever would for a console in the long term
Wow such an uninformed hit piece, seems to be a load of negative over reaction articles the last couple days, from normal retirement being taken to mean doom and gloom to this, the writer makes themselves look silly not even doing basic maths, try a different career, ya might do better at it.
I am primarily a PS gamer. Unfortunately PS Now still isn't even available in Australia for some reason so even making it available would be a good start. Xbox game pass is available. I think being a smaller market Sony doesn't bother with Aus too much so have lost some ground here to MS over the years.
They need to put it back on Vita for one. Secondly, gyro data needs to be disabled for remote play on vita as it wastes bandwidth. Thirdly, disabling accessibility button remapping for remote play is the DUMBEST decision of all time.
Didnt they abandon Vita?
But having it work on Vita really wouldn't cost them anything. There's really no reason not to allow it.
Vita is dead to PlayStation. PSNow will never come back to Vita and they won't add/change any more features.
If its dead then i see no issues hacking it, thats my weekend sorted
Gyro data is about as bandwidth intensive as the analog stick data. It's actually a smaller float variable, and if enabled in game, will be polled on every game loop. If it's not enabled in the game, it'd not take up any data. We're talking maybe 1-2 MB per hour of constant play.
When I wrote this comment I briefly wondered whether I needed to describe latency or instead use a more generally recognized term such as bandwidth. You’re disagreeing with the issue simply because of the term I used. The point is the it negatively impacts remote play performance. It’s a cool feature but remote play is sensitive (look at the stadia controller using direct WiFi to make every effort to improve remote play responsiveness).
Not only that streaming is 720p. Yeah no. If they make everything downloadable it could really be something.
Ps3 can't be downloaded to the ps4, if it could, it would already happened. How they don't offer 1080p streaming is unacceptable at this point