• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.

Markratos

Hermen Hulst's Secret Account
Member
Feb 15, 2020
3,006
Ppl seem to forget sony (like Nintendo) don't have something like windows or Office to bring in huge money to subsidize other departments. Wasn't gaming like 25B for Sony in 2020 while the next closest department was like 1/4th that?

day 1 first party releases on any $10-$15 service is not realistic for anyone but Microsoft.
Lol... Netflix or Disney are also not It the same league of Apple or Amazon and they are putting day 1 content for they platforms.
If Sony does not put their first party content on their subscription service day one, it is because they continue to sell at record speed. Basically their own model is thriving.
 

bsigg

Member
Oct 25, 2017
22,620
If they were to do something like offer a 10-15% discount for the Tier 3 subs on all Sony first party titles digitally including on release day, I could see it being pretty popular simply for the discount.
 

VanDoughnut

Member
Oct 30, 2017
3,431
Sony's not gonna give up games like Spider-Man and GOW Ragnarok selling bananas. They want to have their cake and eat it too.

And there's some small moves they can make and some big moves like legacy software, to make their services more appealing without 1st Party Day 1 releases. But yeah it's all in the execution.
 

catpurrcat

Member
Oct 27, 2017
7,802
Ppl seem to forget sony (like Nintendo) don't have something like windows or Office to bring in huge money to subsidize other departments. Wasn't gaming like 25B for Sony in 2020 while the next closest department was like 1/4th that?

day 1 first party releases on any $10-$15 service is not realistic for anyone but Microsoft.

on the other hand, being a smaller company albeit at still massive in the scope of "all" companies, makes them more nimble and easy to respond to competitive changes in the market

which is what makes this a little bizarre, even though they aren't bogged down by other huge software divisions they are still being perceived as a little slow to respond and per the schreir tweet are internally positioning it as their own game pass competitor
 

Jiggy

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
9,336
wherever
When things are framed like this, it always somehow comes back to deciding that one brand cannot somehow experience growth without the decline or stagnation of another. Why are you so certain they won't just end up matching and hovering around the same region of PlayStation's user base? Those areas of support areas are great, but it's not like Xbox doesn't have various globalisation support issues to overcome unlike PlayStation where the support is strongly reciprocated after decades of efforts.

I don't think people realize that Playstation's numbers have only gone up despite the "rise" of GP. They're breaking industry records practically every quarter.


Xbox is already the place to be for third parties

They are? Why is every 3rd party selling more on PlayStation?
 

catpurrcat

Member
Oct 27, 2017
7,802
If they were to do something like offer a 10-15% discount for the Tier 3 subs on all Sony first party titles digitally including on release day, I could see it being pretty popular simply for the discount.

this is actually a really interesting idea. A bit like Amazon prime or a Costco membership. You pay upfront for the privilege of discounts later.

I guess they have their own financial analysts doing the math behind whether this type of thing makes sense.
 

Crayon

Member
Oct 26, 2017
15,580
If they were to do something like offer a 10-15% discount for the Tier 3 subs on all Sony first party titles digitally including on release day, I could see it being pretty popular simply for the discount.

That is actually such a simple and smart idea. They do bonus discounts on some things on the store for PS+. Having a guaranteed discount on the new big games with this thing makes sense. I mean to say who knows the economics of it, but it's intuitive.
 

Nathan

Member
Oct 27, 2017
719
If they were to do something like offer a 10-15% discount for the Tier 3 subs on all Sony first party titles digitally including on release day, I could see it being pretty popular simply for the discount.
I love this idea, I would be very happy if they did something like this.
 

Deleted member 22750

Oct 28, 2017
13,267
This is stuff is blowing my mind. You clearly mean "to be as good as game pass", but the word "competitor" has become a football. Not just you, obviously. I could have quoted a dozen people.

Is it not enough to like game pass better or even declare like a statement of fact that is better? There has to be literally no competition for it? That's a bit much, no?
it's semantics.
I'm talking about value as perceived by those who can compare to game pass. There is a ton we don't know. Getting people onto their subscription model is gonna be a priority.

download vs stream
What 1st party content
No day 1 releases
 

catpurrcat

Member
Oct 27, 2017
7,802
I think we're all in agreement that bsigg needs to be hired by Sony :)

Again, stellar idea about the tier 3 first party discount.
 

msdstc

Member
Nov 6, 2017
6,885
I think people are overestimating what GP is doing. It is a great service that works for some people, but, for now, doesn't convince the majority of the gamers. Maybe it will, i don't know, but for now the dominating services are the most 'traditional' ones, by Nintendo and Sony, that have much bigger userbases.


This only proves my point lol. A lot of this kinda talk reminds me of Netflix vs blockbuster.
 

Chaos Legion

The Wise Ones
Member
Oct 30, 2017
16,956
Dear God, what is this?

Microsoft does not count Xbox Live only subscribers as Game Pass subscribers because just counting people in that case does not make sense. They have to be paying for something to get extra. In that regard, what is important to Sony is how many people are willing to pay a premium on their existing PS+ accounts to take advantage of increased offerings.

I also think that if Sony launched a Game Pass competitor with games coming in day and date, they would absolutely grow at a faster rate than what Microsoft has been able to do. The question is whether or not they are willing to let go of the existing business model......but right now? They are still king in the console space.
Not sure what you mean?
Sony's video game subscription service, which will replace its current video game subscription services, will have ~45 paying million users. This service, will be compared to Microsoft's video game subscription service (and for the sake of a more apples-to-apples comparison, it would be GamePass and Gold, unless Xbox no longer charges for Gold - haven't played since 360 days, so no idea). Nobody is talking about monthly active users, of which both platforms can claim over 100 million.
 

Det

Member
Jul 30, 2020
13,079
I think we're all in agreement that bsigg needs to be hired by Sony :)

Again, stellar idea about the tier 3 first party discount.

I'm going to self-congratulate myself for making a similar recommendation earlier. Change the % and tier to whatever makes most sense in value perception.

Day 1 first party might not be there but there are other ways to bolster the service i.e., every 6 months of a continuous sub entitles you to redeem 1 full priced 1st party game. Not as large or breadth of access to GP but a different value prop in that you'd own the title outright. Or tier 2 entitles you to 50% off any 1st party at launch. There are a number of different ways to differentiate itself from GP whilst being valuable.
 
Dec 14, 2017
1,314
It doesn't work that way with your math you need to include infrastructure costs, royalties etc for all the other games on the service etc. again unless we know internal returns etc or forecasting can't just assume it's just that simple it typically isn't.
That's yet another thing about MS doing this; they're vertically integrated with servers and services already. This is deep water Xbox is dragging Sony into, and they can't compete there. IMO.
 

12Danny123

Member
Jan 31, 2018
1,722
on the other hand, being a smaller company albeit at still massive in the scope of "all" companies, makes them more nimble and easy to respond to competitive changes in the market

which is what makes this a little bizarre, even though they aren't bogged down by other huge software divisions they are still being perceived as a little slow to respond and per the schreir tweet are internally positioning it as their own game pass competitor

Being a small doesn't mean that you're more agile. It depends on the level of bureaucracy.

I believe the way Sony is organized is SIE. SONY Music and Sony Pictures are all considered separate companies under the Sony brand, there's not a lot of synergy.
 

professor_t

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,345
It'll be interesting to see just how much of a me-too product it is . Will they take it as seriously as Xbox takes GP, or is it going to be noise to try and drown out what Xbox is doing.
I suspect that it will be a solid service, but not at the level of gamepass (which I think is incredible), mainly because Sony already has such a significant competitive advantage over MS in the console space. It will add just a little extra weight to the scales in their favor among prospective consumers who are thinking about an Xbox console.

Either way, I may wind up getting it. I'm an "all console" type of gamer.
 

Ovvv

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt account
Banned
Jan 11, 2019
10,030
That's yet another thing about MS doing this; they're vertically integrated with servers and services already. This is deep water Xbox is dragging Sony into, and they can't compete there. IMO.

Sony's IP creation is approaching a status where they're nearly immune from being "dragged into" anything. They'll offer different services in different spaces and they'll co-exist. The market is growing. Sony doesn't have to compete the same way MS does. Their strategy is pretty different, as seen by their consistent investment in China and Korea.
 

gremlinz1982

Member
Aug 11, 2018
5,332
Not sure what you mean?
Sony's video game subscription service, which will replace its current video game subscription services, will have ~45 paying million users. This service, will be compared to Microsoft's video game subscription service (and for the sake of a more apples-to-apples comparison, it would be GamePass and Gold, unless Xbox no longer charges for Gold - haven't played since 360 days, so no idea). Nobody is talking about monthly active users, of which both platforms can claim over 100 million.
What you propose is madness.

PS+ has 45 million users, this is not the number of people that will be willing to pay for a subscription. This is why Microsoft does not combine Game Pass and Xbox Live Gold because there are people that pay for the latter and just that.

It is the reason why Sony did not combine PS+ and PS Now numbers.
 

Crayon

Member
Oct 26, 2017
15,580
it's semantics.
I'm talking about value as perceived by those who can compare to game pass.

That's exactly how competitors work, though. Comparable products.

If it's just semantics and it doesn't matter, then why so adamant about the terminology? It seems to matter.

Again, not singling you out- it's been an ongoing argument in this huge thread. Otherwise, I probably wouldn't mention it.
 
Dec 14, 2017
1,314
Sony's IP creation is approaching a status where they're nearly immune from being "dragged into" anything. They'll offer different services in different spaces and they'll co-exist. The market is growing. Sony doesn't have to compete the same way MS does. Their strategy is pretty different, as seen by their consistent investment in China and Korea.
Oh, that's just silly. I say this as someone who was a Sony diehard and a "never Xbox again EVER" sort of guy after the disastrous 2013 launch.

No single player in a market has ever been immune to general market trends. Sony isn't a unicorn here, and all it takes is a subtle shift away from the single player experiences Sony excels at producing for them to be in a serious predicament.

Keep in mind, this is happening as Microsoft is also trying to build those third person action narrative games (Hellblade is most prominent), but Microsoft already owns console-exclusive FPSs, driving games, and they're set to dominate western-style RPGs. Xbox is developing a diverse portfolio of game styles and pushing into new models, and two things are driving this:

1. They failed to capture dominance in the traditional game console model.

2. They committed to staying in gaming.

Game Pass is how they're changing the field of competition.

This is all happening while Xbox is also building game streaming tech, and it's offering Game Pass at a price that works better for much more of the world. I heard a Polish gamer say that AAA PlayStation games didn't go from $60 to $70 (equivalent) in Poland, but from a Polish $60 equivalent to a Polish $90 or $95 equivalent. We've all seen how services work better for gamers in Brazil, too.
 

12Danny123

Member
Jan 31, 2018
1,722
I wonder how they will price tier 3. I want to stack up a lot of them.

The price will be very interesting. Currently, PSNow includes free multiplayer support for PSNow only. Because tier 2 and tier 3 includes PS+ I expect the current PSNow subscribers will have to pay more. Tier 3 I expect will depend on how they can get Cloud gaming working at scale while being profitable/sustainable. Anything more than Game Pass Ultimate will result in tier 3 being DOA.
 
Last edited:

Classybro

Member
Oct 27, 2017
577
Sony already has some day 1 Indies and third parties on PS Plus and this new sub seems to be an amalgam of Plus and Now, so it makes sense that would continue. As the proposal seems to be that the content would be further improved, then yes it's within the realm of possibility that even more Indies and third parties would have their content drop day 1.
Yeah that's true and will make it more enticing
 

Ovvv

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt account
Banned
Jan 11, 2019
10,030
Oh, that's just silly. I say this as someone who was a Sony diehard and a "never Xbox again EVER" sort of guy after the disastrous 2013 launch.

No single player in a market has ever been immune to general market trends. Sony isn't a unicorn here, and all it takes is a subtle shift away from the single player experiences Sony excels at producing for them to be in a serious predicament.

Keep in mind, this is happening as Microsoft is also trying to build those third person action narrative games (Hellblade is most prominent), but Microsoft already owns console-exclusive FPSs, driving games, and they're set to dominate western-style RPGs. Xbox is developing a diverse portfolio of game styles and pushing into new models, and two things are driving this:

1. They failed to capture dominance in the traditional game console model.

2. They committed to staying in gaming.

Game Pass is how they're changing the field of competition.

This is all happening while Xbox is also building game streaming tech, and it's offering Game Pass at a price that works better for much more of the world. I heard a Polish gamer say that AAA PlayStation games didn't go from $60 to $70 (equivalent) in Poland, but from a Polish $60 equivalent to a Polish $90 or $95 equivalent. We've all seen how services work better for gamers in Brazil, too.

Your entire post insinuates I'm making a point I never made. Sony doesn't have to compete in the same way MS competes because their IP continues to be strong. Nintendo doesn't have to, either. They aren't being "dragged into" anything.
 

Compbros

Member
Oct 30, 2017
5,660
Again, people seem to be conflating "parity" and "competition". This can be a competitor to Game Pass without being "Game Pass, but Playstation".
 
Dec 14, 2017
1,314
Your entire post insinuates I'm making a point I never made. Sony doesn't have to compete in the same way MS competes because their IP continues to be strong. Nintendo doesn't have to, either. They aren't being "dragged into" anything.
And buggy whip producers need not concern themselves with this Henry Ford person. The very idea is preposterous!
 

vivftp

Member
Oct 29, 2017
19,824
Remember folks, the things that these companies want the most from us is our money and our time. How they go about getting us to spend our money and spend our time could vary wildly, but so long as we give it to them that's all they care about. That's what this all boils down to, in its simplest form.
 

Alpha_ulquiorra

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt account
Banned
Oct 28, 2017
281
User Banned (1 month): Console wars, multiple prior infractions for the same behaviour
That's fine, but then Sony is never going to have a Game Pass-like service, and that sucks for PlayStation owners.
I mean if going through a decade plus of subpar and declining quality games is the prerequisite to getting that I dont want it, nor do i ever care to have it.
Already beat you to it a few posts above

🐸☕



So Elder Scrolls 6 coming day one to Game Pass is due to desperation?
They already set the precedent they cant very well go back on it now can they? Even thought the Zenimax purchased allowed Xbox a better chance to compete they probably still couldnt go head to head against playstation, hence gamepass which allows themn to write their own rules.
 

Ovvv

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt account
Banned
Jan 11, 2019
10,030
And buggy whip producers need not concern themselves with this Henry Ford person. The very idea is preposterous!

If buggy whip producers were still among the highest acclaimed products in the industry then they wouldn't. Unless Game Pass is going to directly lead to more valuable IP in the eyes of the public then this analogy is worthless.
 

Det

Member
Jul 30, 2020
13,079
And buggy whip producers need not concern themselves with this Henry Ford person. The very idea is preposterous!

This is such an asinine comparison. You are comparing a change in business model for distribution (subscription services), to a technological paradigm shift in transportation (buggy whip to motorized cars).
 

Vertpin

Member
Oct 27, 2017
5,920
So, does this also mean we could see PS4/PS5 third party games to download similar to gamepass?
 

Chaos Legion

The Wise Ones
Member
Oct 30, 2017
16,956
What you propose is madness.

PS+ has 45 million users, this is not the number of people that will be willing to pay for a subscription. This is why Microsoft does not combine Game Pass and Xbox Live Gold because there are people that pay for the latter and just that.

It is the reason why Sony did not combine PS+ and PS Now numbers.
I'm not proposing anything.
This thread is about…Sony's revitalized approach to a video game subscription service. This service, once launched, across the three tiers, will have…how many paying users?

All that matters is how well the value proposition service is conveyed to consumers. Whether or not it is a feature for feature competitor to GamePass does not change the fact it will be the gaming subscription service for the PS ecosystem.
 

vivftp

Member
Oct 29, 2017
19,824
I'd be willing to bet that the next MLB will be on this new sub service. Sony no doubt got plenty of useful data from it being on GP last year and from a while back when they put it on one of their sub services a few months after launch.

The TLOU MP title also seems logical to put here as a day 1 release
 

Antrax

Member
Oct 25, 2017
13,340
PS Now (Which conceptually isn't much different from the base Gamepass) exists for over 7 years and Gamepass for 4, if they wanted to merge Now and Plus just to say ''here's our Gamepass competitor'' they could've done already.

They could have, and based on Jason's post here, maybe they always thought PS Now was a GP competitor. But PS Now clearly wasn't set up that way for like 5 years. Originally it was a rental service at a high price with no download options and minimal content. They've pivoted on that several times but the service has apparently still been disappointing.

They need Day 1 games. If not 1st party, then they need to secure several 3rd party games. People justify the cost of GP because $10-15 is cheaper than $40-60 (which they would've paid otherwise for the game dropping that month or next month). Back catalog stuff alone doesn't let you compare prices favorably in that way. Like, God of War should be in this service for sure. But also God of War is $10 right now in the PS Store. That game alone won't get me to sub to a service for it. Obviously buying all of the PS back catalog is expensive, but they need to consider how many of those titles they've given out before, which ones will have licensing issues, etc...

Like I said, doesn't mean they have to put the new God of War on this thing at launch. But if not that, then they need to go grab some 3rd party deals and get them to drop simultaneously on the service instead
 

Crayon

Member
Oct 26, 2017
15,580
Just putting the marquis games on later is a simple compromise. Waiting isn't that annoying. But having them up for a limited time is annoying. I understand games have to rotate, but it would be better if their own games were mostly permanent.
 

ItsBradazHD

Member
Nov 21, 2018
774
Could easily see Sony dropping CERTAIN first party titles on the service Day 1, non-f2p Multiplayer focussed titles or something like MLB that was seemingly successful on Game Pass but I don't think they need everything Day 1 for this be a "Game Pass Competitor". They just need to bring enough value to the service, in their own way.

One thing I hope, is that things aren't frontloaded like they are now with PS+ and PS Now. What Game Pass excels at, and is what keeps it in the forefront of people's mind, is the fact that every week they're seemingly confirming or hinting at new titles for the service, announcing 3P/indies for day 1 release months in advance, and having multiple drops of games into the service each month as opposed to PS+/Now coming the first week of the month on a single day, and in the case of Now, lacking in comparative quantity.

Having everything under 1 subscription banner will help immensely for understanding Sony's streaming offerings and what comes where. Which as much as we're clued up in, the general public really isn't
 
Dec 14, 2017
1,314
This is such an asinine comparison. You are comparing a change in business model for distribution (subscription services), to a technological paradigm shift in transportation (buggy whip to motorized cars).
I'm talking about a revolutionary change in the way people consume a product or service (transportation is or can be both a product and a service, as can transportation).
-
Access models for easily digitized goods are and have been winning out for a while. You can still buy digital music on iTunes/Apple Music, but most people stream or pay for access to an entire library.
 

Patrese86

Member
Jun 6, 2021
885
But why would they create new emulators for PS1 and PSP on PS4/5 (or use the existing ones they already have on PS4), and not make them available natively? If the games are already natively able to run on PS4 hardware, why would they not just make them available to download, as they did with PS2 games?
Sorry I didn't even realise you could download PS2 games (despite having subbed to the service previously!) till I read your post. That being said there isn't alot is there? I just don't really have huge confidence in them because they've added so little over the years.
They could have, and based on Jason's post here, maybe they always thought PS Now was a GP competitor. But PS Now clearly wasn't set up that way for like 5 years. Originally it was a rental service at a high price with no download options and minimal content. They've pivoted on that several times but the service has apparently still been disappointing.

They need Day 1 games. If not 1st party, then they need to secure several 3rd party games. People justify the cost of GP because $10-15 is cheaper than $40-60 (which they would've paid otherwise for the game dropping that month or next month). Back catalog stuff alone doesn't let you compare prices favorably in that way. Like, God of War should be in this service for sure. But also God of War is $10 right now in the PS Store. That game alone won't get me to sub to a service for it. Obviously buying all of the PS back catalog is expensive, but they need to consider how many of those titles they've given out before, which ones will have licensing issues, etc...

Like I said, doesn't mean they have to put the new God of War on this thing at launch. But if not that, then they need to go grab some 3rd party deals and get them to drop simultaneously on the service instead

Why do they have to put 3rd parties on the service day one? I sub to Gamepass and I don't see the latest Battlefield, Call of Duty, FIFA 22, NHL22, 2k22 on there.

They don't need day one, they need a better catalogue of older games, both 3rd party and first party, most of the Gamepass selection is old games and aside from first party day one stuff, other day one stuff is completely underwhelming.
 
Last edited:

Det

Member
Jul 30, 2020
13,079
I'm talking about a revolutionary change in the way people consume a product or service (transportation is or can be both a product and a service, as can transportation).
-
Access models for easily digitized goods are and have been winning out for a while. You can still buy digital music on iTunes/Apple Music, but most people stream or pay for access to an entire library.

Which makes the analogy even more ludicrous. Unlike buggy-whip manufacturers, PS has similar service models for the distribution of digitized goods, along with 'esteem' content. Is it as extensive and built out re: service model as Xbox? No, but the foundation is there, unlike the analogies used throughout this thread. The consolidation of services, simplification of messaging/marketing of said services, building out BC for legacy content, and pooling/increasing resources for day-1 3rd party indies/AAA is a major step forward in and of itself. There are a multitude of other value-adds outside of day-1 1st party launches e.g., x% discount on any 1st party title, entitlement for x number of titles based on sub length, DLC/MTX discounts, other multi-media add-ons etc.

Regardless, this is all conjecture and pointless until we know the official picture. My original reply wasn't to get involved with this discussion, just the fundamental issue with the comparisons laid out.
 

KeRaSh

I left my heart on Atropos
Member
Oct 26, 2017
10,333
I keep seeing people state that Sony does not need to make their games available day and date for this to work. How are third party games going to carry the subscription? Sony has tried that, Google has tried that.
I mean, this worked for Microsoft while their first party output was still severely lacking. Why shouldn't it for Sony, even if their first party titles become available after a few months? People are already waiting for sales anyways. Might as well play some third party games included in your sub until the big hitters become available? It's not that hard to imagine a scenario like that that works.
 

ShinUltramanJ

Member
Oct 27, 2017
12,950
I'm fairly confident all third parties pubs make more money from playstation than xbox.

That's going to be a case by case basis.

We don't know what Microsoft pays publishers to get their games, day one. I'm sure it's a good amount. Outside of sales, there's also the exposure factor. Being on Game Pass brings in players who otherwise might not even consider the game.

It's not just about sales. Just your game played by millions of players is big deal.