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

[Mr Puggsly]

DonFerrari said:

Mr Puggsly said:

I think you clarified Sony's strategy. The competitors aren't putting up any notable Sony 1st party games of this gen (not even old stuff), therefore Sony shouldn't either... even on their own service. Its an interesting strategy, I can't think of any other company doing that. I mean Disney+ has tons of Disney content, even new stuff. Sony though, "let them have Knack."

Well your title "PSNow could be awesome service if it wasn't for Sony. And your biggest complain is the lack of 1st party Sony games. Unless I became iliterate over the past day, this if means that if some other company owned PS Now it would be awesome and also would solve the problem you have with lack of 1st party games. Except it wouldn't, any other company owning the service and there would be 0 Sony games on it.

sales2099 said:

You said it not me. PS Now is a far older service and yet GP (2 years btw) has a more robust service to its gamers. The only real benefit PSNow offers is streaming. But you know that wasn’t what I was referring to. It’s the inclusion of all first party content instead of giving old scraps and making it available day 1. Like I said before, Xbox’s loss this gen is my gain and compared to GP, except in streaming, the competition does look like a afterthought. It would be wrong if you to assume all games going forward are somehow cheaping out because they are made for the service. Sure smaller games like Bleeding Edge were made for it, but I have seen no evidence of Forza Horizon 4 or Gears 5 being less then full content games. Yet they were both added day 1. You better then that and it’s not like we can’t buy physical anymore, it’s a option and it’s not like every XB user has GP.

The games you listed were made before GP was even a thing, give it a full gen focused on GP and make the math. PS+ that is something much cheaper than GP, having 40M subs at 50USD year, and even with royalties, profit from exclusives and profit from HW the department doesn't make over 300M per year in profit. So I wouldn't expect much over 100M profit from this, GP have less subs and much higher cost so how many AAA games do you think it could sustain (don't forget MS have to pay a good buck for the other companies there). Show us the viability of GP sustaining 15 studios making AAA games.

Don is trying to argue semantics. I am arguing Sony could do better than Knack.

Maybe I am misinterpreting what you're saying, but I don't think the goal of Gamepass is to sustain all gaming software coming from MS.

More importantly, this isn't a console war debate. I think PS Now is cool for what it is, but PS Now sucking at 1st party PS4 games is just a Sony issue.