| Teeqoz said: TV to Netflix is a bad comparison. You go from one subscription service where you can't choose which content you see at any given time to another subscription service where you can choose what content you wanna watch at any given time. Besides... *points to how TV shows have a full TV run before they come to Netflix* And *points to how films have a full cinema run before they launch on DVD/blu-ray, before they even later launch on Netflix* PSNow will not be a replacement of the Playstation home console ecosystem. It will be a paralell service. Think about CoD for instance. It sells like 10 million first week, at a price of 60$. I'm not 100% sure how much of those 60$ go to the publisher, but I'm fairly vertain retailer margins are not higher than 20$ for a 60$ video game. That means 40$ revenue to the pub per copy, of which maybe 8$ they have to pay to the platform holder, and 3$ goes to packaging and physical media and shipping costs. Then there's the cost of unsold copies. So, in the end, Activision gets at least 25$ revenue per copy.
What would your suggested pricing be for streaming CoD a month, which you think people might realistically pay for it? Or should it launch directly as part of the PSNow subscription program? In that case, how much does Activision get paid per hour of in game time? How much would this subscription service cost to be able to pay for AAA games launching directly on the service? |
It's not a bad comparison at all. You go from an antiquated consumer system to one that isn't antiquated. There are plenty of examples through Netflix, Hulu, HBO Go, etc where programs that debut first or exclusively for these services have become arguably more successful as a result. You may not think TV is comparable to consoles, but limited run theatrical releases definitely aren't.
It definitely will be the replacement. There are ways to to monetize in ways that make the developer money while not effecting the consumer end. It's frankly not up to me to figure out how it'll be monetized, but there's already proof, even in PS Plus, that such a monitization format is out there. I think that people would gladly pay like $25 for a month for access to the entire library of PS Now games, with the subscription curve getting cheaper the more long term you pay, $60 for 3 months, etc. Then they would have the rental services for individual game rentals be based on the publishers.
That's why it's smart that they released PS Now so early. All the pricing and streaming kinks get ironed out now while they build the library. I'd put money on seeing PS1 or PS2 games on the service by the end of next year, and I'd honesly even see PS4 games put on it by like 2018. Once the PS4 hits its twilight years, you'll see new games released simultaneously for both. You honestly might even see the PS Now TV release within that time period before the PS4 ends officially. $150 for the streaming box and a DS4 with the ability to stream PS1/2/3/and 4 games? Sony will make a killing. It'll be like PS+ on steroids, only mandatory.
The real genious will come if they're smart enough to put it on stuff like Apple TV, or even competitor's systems. There's no reason, other than pride (on both ends), that they couldn't, but they would make so much more money off of that. PS Now on XBO or Wii U/NX? So much money to be made where they previously may have had lost sales. Someone with an NX/XBO may not be willing to drop another $400 on a PS4, but they may drop $60 on a DS4 and than $15 for two weeks of Uncharted 4, or whatever the pricing would be. They love the game. Add another two weeks. Love the series. Rent 1,2, and 3. Love the brand, subcribe for the next year for what adds up to $240.
