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

[DonFerrari]

sales2099 said:

DonFerrari said:

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.

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.

You leave the details to MSs team, that isn’t the problem of us. Phil says it’s sustainable and I find it hard to believe they would plan this out years in advance knowing just how little money they would be making.

Did you know game sales increase for GP titles over time? That’s because GP users recommend titles to friends without the service. Word of mouth is a powerful thing. Maybe devs pay MS to stay on the service for the exposure, we honestly don’t know their full revenue stream beyond just paying subscribers. And we know at least half of MS studios are A-AA and buying outright is still a majority option for gamers.

Ever considered the revenue coming in from PC gamers? Both outright buys and PC GamePass? MS doesn’t lock their games behind a console anymore. 

Overall I think you agree that Sony could be a little less stingy with their 1st party on a service emphasizing PlayStation experiences. And GP being an objectively better service just drives the point home all the more. But you shouldn’t assume quality will go down because all games will be made for the service, that’s a FUD narrative and I think while I’m not above it you are (compliment).

I didn't dispute they can or will make money on GP. That doesn't mean the quality of the content will increase. And with MS giving exactly 0 number on sales we can't even see how much the day one titles are selling overall.

Will keep in mind half of the studios being A-AA when you or some other MS fan try to do the "we now have as many studios so we will fight on the 1st party SW quantity and quality" and stuff like that =p. And yes GP with day one would be more sustainable with more A-AA titles than AAA.

Even with the PC purchases the MS games are selling lower than they did on X360 and much lower than what Sony titles are selling, and PS games are locked on PS, also not to forget that historically the revenue made on PC is much lower than on consoles. Even juggernauts like GTA gives preference to console.

Yes sure Sony could do better I have acknowledge it, and also gave the reasons why they don't currently (and sure it could change). It isn't a certainty on quality will go lower, it is a concern because of sustainability of the business model. Myself I would prefer it increases quality and quantity and sure people paying less, receiving more and being positive. Still that isn't what I have seem with Netflix and worry that can happen with GP, PSNow, XCloud, etc.