By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - When will ps3 and Vita stop getting ps plus games?

VAMatt on 04 September 2017
burninmylight said:
dukerx2 said:
As someone who hasn't downloaded a Vita or PS3 plus game in years, hopefully sooner than later. I'd rather see that money put towards more PS4 games or more AAA PS4 games or PSVR. I'm sure they have internal data showing a enough people still download them to keep releasing them.

What money? The money it costs to keep ROMs on a server? That's pennies on a dollar compared to AAA game development. Sony is making far more money keeping millions of PS+ subscribers and gamers in its ecosystem than it is hoping to sell a few million copies of games that cost hundreds of millions in development, publishing and advertising. If you want Sony to keep bankrolling more games, you should want this service to stay available for as many subscribers as possible.

More like fractions of a penny on the dollar, relative to AAA game development.  



Around the Network
KBG29 on 04 September 2017

I would like to see the PS3 dropped, and PSVR added very soon. PS Vita can stick around until we get a PS4 Phone/Portable, so maybe 2019/2020. Then I think they should do 2 AAA PS4 titles, 1 AAA PSVR title, 1 PSVR indie, and 2 Phone game promotions.



Stop hate, let others live the life they were given. Everyone has their problems, and no one should have to feel ashamed for the way they were born. Be proud of who you are, encourage others to be proud of themselves. Learn, research, absorb everything around you. Nothing is meaningless, a purpose is placed on everything no matter how you perceive it. Discover how to love, and share that love with everything that you encounter. Help make existence a beautiful thing.

Kevyn B Grams
10/03/2010 

KBG29 on PSN&XBL

hunter_alien on 04 September 2017
Darwinianevolution said:

As long as they keep their online services open, why would they stop getting games? PS* users already pay a ridiculous fee for that service, I'd be angry if my old systems stopped getting games.

Yeah, we are paying the ammount Nintendo is asking for a 30 year old NES title for 6 games, betas and promotions. What a ridiculous ammount to pay indeed.

OT: I would say probably 1-2 years for PS3 and maybe a bit more for the Vita, just to create the impressions of the 10 year lifecycle.



Vote the Mayor for Mayor!

dukerx2 on 04 September 2017
burninmylight said:
dukerx2 said:
As someone who hasn't downloaded a Vita or PS3 plus game in years, hopefully sooner than later. I'd rather see that money put towards more PS4 games or more AAA PS4 games or PSVR. I'm sure they have internal data showing a enough people still download them to keep releasing them.

What money? The money it costs to keep ROMs on a server? That's pennies on a dollar compared to AAA game development. Sony is making far more money keeping millions of PS+ subscribers and gamers in its ecosystem than it is hoping to sell a few million copies of games that cost hundreds of millions in development, publishing and advertising. If you want Sony to keep bankrolling more games, you should want this service to stay available for as many subscribers as possible.

The money developers get paid for having their games on plus, that money. If they are not spending the money on Ps3 and Vita games they can spend it elsewhere. Thats my point. 



Dgc1808 on 04 September 2017

Perhaps by the end of 2018. Remember when many laughed at Sony's "Ten year plan"? Good time.



4 ≈ One

Around the Network
Zoombael on 04 September 2017
burninmylight said:
dukerx2 said:
As someone who hasn't downloaded a Vita or PS3 plus game in years, hopefully sooner than later. I'd rather see that money put towards more PS4 games or more AAA PS4 games or PSVR. I'm sure they have internal data showing a enough people still download them to keep releasing them.

What money? The money it costs to keep ROMs on a server? That's pennies on a dollar compared to AAA game development. Sony is making far more money keeping millions of PS+ subscribers and gamers in its ecosystem than it is hoping to sell a few million copies of games that cost hundreds of millions in development, publishing and advertising. If you want Sony to keep bankrolling more games, you should want this service to stay available for as many subscribers as possible.

You got hard numbers to back it up?



Hunting Season is done...

Kerotan on 04 September 2017

Will there be enough ps3 or vita games to last until 2019? That could be up to 50 ps3 games between now and then. If they run out of good titles and are just giving away shovelware they may aswell just stop.



Azhraell on 04 September 2017

Offerings for PS3/Vita have been pretty meh for a while, so hopefully soon. That way they can focus on PS4 or even PSVR and make me buy those :P



burninmylight on 04 September 2017
dukerx2 said:
burninmylight said:

What money? The money it costs to keep ROMs on a server? That's pennies on a dollar compared to AAA game development. Sony is making far more money keeping millions of PS+ subscribers and gamers in its ecosystem than it is hoping to sell a few million copies of games that cost hundreds of millions in development, publishing and advertising. If you want Sony to keep bankrolling more games, you should want this service to stay available for as many subscribers as possible.

The money developers get paid for having their games on plus, that money. If they are not spending the money on Ps3 and Vita games they can spend it elsewhere. Thats my point. 

I see your point. But my question is, why do you think Sony has this tiny, miniscule PS+ budget that only has room in the mini-fridge for so many PS+ titles, and eliminating PS3 and Vita would somehow mean more room in the mini-fridge for PS4? If it wasn't beneficial to Sony, why would Sony still be supporting those platforms four years into PS4, and if it wasn't beneficial to publishers of games on PS+, why would they want their PS3 and Vita games on PS+?

That's like saying Steam should stop supporting Mac and Linux because it would somehow mean more games for PC. I highly doubt it's support of those OSes has no bearing on the number of games released for PC.

It's like saying the Humble Bundle people need to stop doing PC and Mac software bundles and focus only on Steam game bundles because that would mean more money for them, and the indies and publishers that put their games into Humble Bundle don't profit in some way from doing so. Actually, everyone seems to benefit from these. I've read interviews saying as much.



burninmylight on 04 September 2017
Zoombael said:
burninmylight said:

What money? The money it costs to keep ROMs on a server? That's pennies on a dollar compared to AAA game development. Sony is making far more money keeping millions of PS+ subscribers and gamers in its ecosystem than it is hoping to sell a few million copies of games that cost hundreds of millions in development, publishing and advertising. If you want Sony to keep bankrolling more games, you should want this service to stay available for as many subscribers as possible.

You got hard numbers to back it up?

....You need me to provide stats to prove to you that hosting ROMs on a server and giving indies/pubs a cut of discounted games for a $50 USD/year subscription service brings in more revenue than paying hundreds of millions of dollars for AAA game development?

OK, then. My five minutes of research shows that Sony is normally pretty stingy with Playstation Plus details about subscribers and revenue, but I found these:

PSN makes more money than all of Nintendo in fiscal year 2016, generating 529.1 billion yen:

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2016-04-28-sonys-psn-is-making-more-money-than-all-of-nintendo

Of course, that includes actual games sold on PSN, not just PS+ though.

I also found an article stating PS+ and XBL generated around $3 billion USD (not yen) in revenue in 2016:

http://www.playstationlifestyle.net/2017/01/16/superdata-playstation-plus-xbox-live-generated-around-3-billion-2016/

I challenge you to find me a Sony AAA game that has come close to generating that kind of revenue. A PS+ subscriber is essentially someone who purchases at least one new game per year.

"Back in June 2016, Sony revealed that there were nearly 21 million PlayStation Plus subscribers, as of April 2016."
So to match that kind of earnings, even if we don't factor in the actual cost of AAA game development, a game whose Day 1 price is equivalent to a PS+ subscription and released in April of last year would need to sell 21 million copies to match PS+ revenue. Show me the Sony game that can do this, and is so evergreen that it can keep matching or growing its numbers every year.