PS Now could be an awesome service if it wasn't for Sony.

[Mr Puggsly]

DialgaMarine said:

Mr Puggsly said:

Again, I am not suggesting PS Now needs to be Gamepass. I don't get the impression you read the OP.

Also, you ignore games that launch on subscription services can get more attention/players. MS tends to announce user numbers because of that very fact. So your theory games get ignored in subscription services is not reality. There are also indie games that get more attention from subscription services, not just AAA releases.

Content on Gamepass needs to be notable to keep people on the service. Content isn't just produced for Gamepass either. The content is sold outside of Gamepass and notable content is needed to hype the console.

The same applies to Netflix, HBO Go and other subscription services like that. They need to produce notable content to keep people. They don't thrive from a quantity of content, it needs to be good or atleast have an audience.

For $60 a year, I think PS Now is a good service for older games. In fact, I am saying it needs more old 1st party games from PS4.

Essentially everything you said is irrelevant because you seemingly didn't read my OP. Also, your assumptions seem inaccurate thus far.

Games need to make a profit. In theory, yes they could make money from a pool resource like PS Now, or GamePass, but that’s assuming the money they get from that pool is based on how many people actually play their game. Game saturation will always be a concern in this instance. Could Sony do it better be releasing AAA PS4 titles on it more often, sure, but why do it if a game already sells extremely well?

Content on subscription services is a source revenue as well. For example we saw Forza Horizon 4 sold well and likely encouraged people to sign up for Gamepass. Not everybody wants to be on subscription service.

I am not gonna respond to the rest of your comment because I am not entirely sure what you're saying.