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

[Mr Puggsly]

DonFerrari said:

Mr Puggsly said:

See, this is the problem with PS Now. Its so underwhelming that people can't stay on topic.

And this is you not want being war and staying on topic right? 

1. Software quality isn't determined by sales. I mean x sales doesn't equal x quality. More importantly, IPs get bigger budgets if they have big sales potential or if a risk is being taken.

Where have I said that sales determine quality? I was replying to sales saying that the GP increased the sales of MS titles, to which I replied we don`t have MS sales number to attest anything.

2. AAA games tend to require years of development, refer to Sony's delays. So B-A-AA and maybe indie-ish titles also exist to fill holes and offer variety in other genres. Not every project needs to be AAA. No big publisher is just in the AAA business, Sony included.

Have I said otherwise? Still most of Sony studios are AAA, and I haven`t complained about B-A-AA titles being made, have I? What I said is that you wouldn`t be able to sustain AAA studios with GP and that there is a possibility of it making the scope and quality drop exactly because quantity is more needed than quality for a subscription model with low entry price (how many MS fans have bragged about being able to get the best titles from MS, day one for 1-10 bucks? Will we pretend this isn`t money lost?) so I worry that this type of model could make a loss for the quality of the games.

3. It doesn't matter if other companies are having better software sales, I mean Nintendo dominates both Sony and MS. What actually matters, are games making enough money to justify their budgets?

Gran Turismo sales have declined significantly. Should quality go down? No, assuming sales are strong enough to justify that AAA budget.

Have I said otherwise? If sales or more precisely profit go down products may need to become cheaper or sell more, so it can reach a point where it would exactly go as I said.

4. Just wait and see what happens with MS's software quality. Thus far its already been years of improving quality but you remain skeptical.

If you can't stay on topic, at least stop making comments that ignore all logic.

Evidence of this improved quality? Because all we have is that this gen it was much worse than previous, and the recent titles aren`t any show of it being better than at the start of the gen.

Sure MS bought more studios and we need to see what they will come to, but to pretend GP have made improvements to the quality of the MS development have no evidence.

You pretend your words don't imply anything, but you're actually making claims.

1. You're suggesting quality is gonna go down because declining software sales and Gamepass. But you don't really know if game budgets have been impacted, gone up or gone down. Its all pointless speculating, but you act as if your speculation is valid.

2. MS isn't sustaining their AAA games with Gamepass alone. Therefore that whole argument you're making is pointless. Its also possible many users who don't want to buy full price games are opting for Gamepass thus increasing revenue.

3. If sales or profits go down significantly or stay modest, IPs might just disappear. That generally just happens. You're suggesting Gamepass will cause this happen which hasn't been the case thus far, several years in.

4. I am not saying Gamepass improved the quality of MS software, I am saying MS is improving the quality of their software while running Gamepass. Hence, quality hasn't been impacted by Gamepass. No evidence Gears 5 and Forza Horizon 4 were negatively impacted by Gamepass. Halo:MCC got a massive overhaul and launched Gamepass. Hence, quality has gone up and output is going to increase.

If Halo Infinite is a notable release, I guess that would be more evidence MS is improving quality of their software.

But to get back on topic. Is it time for Knack 2 to save PS Now?