Quantcast
How Would You Improve Playstation Plus on the PS5?

Forums - Sony Discussion - How Would You Improve Playstation Plus on the PS5?

Less downtime in the store



 "I think people should define the word crap" - Kirby007

Join the Prediction League http://www.vgchartz.com/predictions

Around the Network
LordLichtenstein said:

Playstation Plus – $9.99 per month

  • Playstation NowGain access to a growing library of over 750 PS, PS2, PS3, PS4 & PS5 games. Stream your favorite games directly to your PS5, PC, mobile or tablet, or download to your PS5.

$10 a month is too much. Stadia is about to prove how stupid streaming is. Nobody will touch it after Stadia crashes and burns this winter. Sony doesn't need to go the MS route of putting their games on mobile and PC, because Sony actually sells consoles. PS4 is currently selling faster than the PS2. 

If Sony really wants to increase the number of PS+ subscribers they can lower the price to $2.50 a month, while providing the exact same services and games. More people would be willing to subscirbe at that price point, and they would wind up making more money in the long run since they would have twice as many subscribers as before, or even more. 



The sentence below is false. 
The sentence above is true. 

dharh said:
Free multiplayer people are talking about. Best prepare for the worst experience. The costs are way too prohibitive for that.

A tiered system might work, but I doubt the lowest multiplayer only tier would be as low as people would think/want it to be.

Other than that I'm actually relatively happy with PSPlus as is. Wouldn't mind a mid tier with just multiplayer, cloud storage, and share play. Premium tier(s) should be reserved for free games per month and/or streaming.

Resistance 2 had 60 man multiplayer matches, back when online multiplayer was free. Servers don't cost much to run these days. It's not 2004 anymore. 



The sentence below is false. 
The sentence above is true. 

Putting better games on the free offering /thread.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

I would actually use the money from PS+ to improve PSN and the PS5 OS for the entire generation.

I would be much happier with PS+ if I got no free games, but PSN was more Reliable/Faster, and the PS4 OS had continued to get meaningful UI improvements the whole gen.

We have not seen any improvements to PSN for a years. Online support is being pulled from 1st Party PS4 Games. The PS4 is going on 3 years without any UI improvements or New Features in the OS.

I have no problem putting money towards people constantly working to improve the Network and the OS, but I have Zero interest being forced to pay $60 a year for 24 random games, I either don't want, or have already bought, just to be able to access online gameplay. If I have to pay for Online Gaming, then I expect that money to be spect on improving online gaming, and optimizing the OS to continually improve the Online Gaming Expereince.



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

Around the Network
EricHiggin said:
asqarkabab said:
Completly dissolve plus this piece of crap and make online play free again
Chrkeller said:

This.  

Kanemaru said:
By making it free again, as it was before PS4. But since players are happy to pay always more for things they don't have to pay, that won't happen.

Assuming PS will spread this sub money to more than just online services, and use some of it for hardware purposes going forward, if there were 2 possible outcomes for PS5 hardware based on PS Plus subs, which would you prefer?

1. PS4 having free online this entire gen, leading to a $399-$499 PS5 that cost $399-$499 to make. (imagine another PS4 type launch basically)

or

2. PS4 having paid online as it has all gen, leading to a $399-$499 PS5 that cost $599-$699 to make. (imagine a PS3 type launch but affordable)

I think PS would be crazy not to use some of this money for extra manufacturing costs to make the next gen hardware better than it otherwise would be, while also using some of those sub funds, as well as the next gen subs, to offset the cost of the subsidy for that better more affordable hardware.

It's possible that PS just offers choice 1 no matter what and only uses the sub funds for online since that's where it came from, but I think that would be foolish of them. Using it partially for better more affordable hardware to get as many people into the ecosystem as quickly as possible would help justify the sub cost for many people. Others won't care regardless though and would just rather have free online.

This is similar to how I was trying to explain to someone about why Online is free on PC and Mobile. They were going on about how they don't have to pay to play online on their PC and Smartphone so they shouldn't have to pay on Consoles. I said, you could have online for free on consoles, all you would have to do is pay $1,200 for a $400 console. PC's and Smartphones are sold at 2 - 3x cost, consoles are sold at break even or a loss. PC and Smartphone sellers make money off the hardware, console makers make money off software and services. In the end, you pay the same, it is just a matter of whether you pay up front, or over time.

It is really hard for people to understand that Sony and Microsoft are basically giving you a Console for Free so that you will spend money in their ecosystem. 



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

twintail said:
Tridrakious said:
Offer early access to first party titles.

If you have Plus and purchase/pre order through the PlayStation Store or participating retailer, you get a digital license of the game up to 2 weeks earlier than accounts without Plus.

If you prefer to buy from a retailer, the receipt would have your code to redeem on the store.

uh yes. allow non plus users to have to wait 2 weeks after the release date to play the game. That will surely show their customers what they think of them.

Uh, that's not what I said at all.



Add more monthly games: 2 PS4 games, 1 PSVR game and 2 PS5 games



Tridrakious said:
twintail said:

uh yes. allow non plus users to have to wait 2 weeks after the release date to play the game. That will surely show their customers what they think of them.

Uh, that's not what I said at all.

Sure, it isn't. However I am merely presenting the reality of the suggestion. With the amount of money Sony puts into SP games (that may lack the infinite replayability of MP games), Sony needs the games to be as perfect as possible upon release (and even before review codes go out). If you consider that this means that their devs continue to work on a game after it has gone gold, in order to get final polish done on the game before release (hence day 1 patches), why would Sony now put at risk release a game that is 'incomplete' for certain users?

That is just bringing up the possibility of bad press, and we all saw what bad press did for DriveClub and The Order 1886. 

Hence, the games wouldn't be given 2 weeks earlier. They would be given on the date they internally would have expected the game to be ready, and then the actual release date for everyone else is in reality a delayed release.

Those 2 weeks are so vital in ensuring that the game is running they way they need it t of for release, that there is no way they will give that up just for their Plus users to have access to their games early (and not complete).

Besides, PS Plus is paying for online access to games, something most of Sony's output this gen have actually lacked.



KBG29 said:
I would actually use the money from PS+ to improve PSN and the PS5 OS for the entire generation.

I would be much happier with PS+ if I got no free games, but PSN was more Reliable/Faster, and the PS4 OS had continued to get meaningful UI improvements the whole gen.

We have not seen any improvements to PSN for a years. Online support is being pulled from 1st Party PS4 Games. The PS4 is going on 3 years without any UI improvements or New Features in the OS.

I have no problem putting money towards people constantly working to improve the Network and the OS, but I have Zero interest being forced to pay $60 a year for 24 random games, I either don't want, or have already bought, just to be able to access online gameplay. If I have to pay for Online Gaming, then I expect that money to be spect on improving online gaming, and optimizing the OS to continually improve the Online Gaming Expereince.

This is why they should at least offer 2 PS Plus options, maybe more with PS Now built in. A Plus package with just access to online for around $25 per year, a Plus Premium package with free games, demo's, etc, for around $50 per year, and maybe a Plus Premium Now package for around $75 per year.

Some users will save and go with the cheaper option, but some will pay more and opt in for the all in one more expensive option. Overall the user base should grow bringing in even more money. This money should be spread across many sectors like hardware, software, online, next gen, etc.

KBG29 said:
EricHiggin said:

Assuming PS will spread this sub money to more than just online services, and use some of it for hardware purposes going forward, if there were 2 possible outcomes for PS5 hardware based on PS Plus subs, which would you prefer?

1. PS4 having free online this entire gen, leading to a $399-$499 PS5 that cost $399-$499 to make. (imagine another PS4 type launch basically)

or

2. PS4 having paid online as it has all gen, leading to a $399-$499 PS5 that cost $599-$699 to make. (imagine a PS3 type launch but affordable)

I think PS would be crazy not to use some of this money for extra manufacturing costs to make the next gen hardware better than it otherwise would be, while also using some of those sub funds, as well as the next gen subs, to offset the cost of the subsidy for that better more affordable hardware.

It's possible that PS just offers choice 1 no matter what and only uses the sub funds for online since that's where it came from, but I think that would be foolish of them. Using it partially for better more affordable hardware to get as many people into the ecosystem as quickly as possible would help justify the sub cost for many people. Others won't care regardless though and would just rather have free online.

This is similar to how I was trying to explain to someone about why Online is free on PC and Mobile. They were going on about how they don't have to pay to play online on their PC and Smartphone so they shouldn't have to pay on Consoles. I said, you could have online for free on consoles, all you would have to do is pay $1,200 for a $400 console. PC's and Smartphones are sold at 2 - 3x cost, consoles are sold at break even or a loss. PC and Smartphone sellers make money off the hardware, console makers make money off software and services. In the end, you pay the same, it is just a matter of whether you pay up front, or over time.

It is really hard for people to understand that Sony and Microsoft are basically giving you a Console for Free so that you will spend money in their ecosystem. 

While there are more than a few problems, I think the biggest issue is the lack of choice for online. 1 choice for $60 per year and that's it, and it's certainly not bare bones. If PS at least adds another option, or more, especially a much cheaper option, this should help. PS3 is the other problem.

Another question to ask is how much if any of the online price was baked into the PS3 hardware? I have to assume some cost was in there, and that online wasn't completely free, even if it was only a small portion of the msrp. While going from free online to paid probably seems ridiculous, you also got a much cheaper more affordable console right off the bat, but have to pay a fairly reasonable amount over the course of your online playtime on that console. Not to mention PS4's online is considerably better than PS3 in many ways. $600 was too much all at once, so it was spread out over years with PS4. PS was overly generous with PS3 because they screwed up and MS struck Live Gold, but they figured things out, regrouped, and presented a much more reasonable offering overall this time around with the PS4 ecosystem. It's not perfect though, as nothing ever is. Nothing in life is free unfortunately and everything get's paid back one way or another eventually.

Paying for online, even a lesser amount, would be worth it as long as the online system as well as overall ecosystem benefits from it, and could even lead to things like the end of mid gen consoles possibly. If PS can launch another PS3 esque console in terms of hardware and software improvement based on today's tech, for $399-$499, they should be able to go another 6 or more years before needing new hardware, like PS3. This of course would help devs and would mean even better things for games next gen.



The Canadian National Anthem According To Justin Trudeau

 

Oh planet Earth! The home of native lands, 
True social law, in all of us demand.
With cattle farts, we view sea rise,
Our North sinking slowly.
From far and snide, oh planet Earth, 
Our healthcare is yours free!
Science save our land, harnessing the breeze,
Oh planet Earth, smoke weed and ferment yeast.
Oh planet Earth, ell gee bee queue and tee.