Mr Puggsly said:
Their financial problems began before well before their $8 a month strategy. That's something they started doing in recent months. I've completed numerous games on the service and it generally worked fine. The biggest reason for OnLive's failure is weak support. That's a death sentence for any platform. |
Ok fair enough. But seeing that $8/month is basically 60% more than PS+ but on PSNow that could give you access to north of 1k titles in the future, and each publisher wanting a slice I find hard to believe it would cost less than 20 month... If $3/month is good value on 4/5 games on EA, imagine how much it would be with 20-30 publishers and thousand of games.

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
Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."







