At the rate of which his predictions are correct I honestly wish he was quoted as saying "PlayStation is now a joke."

Films are not shown in theatres for more than 6 months.  That's a significant difference vs. new games which sell alot of copies in first year.
This isn't about Sony's own agenda.  The offerings for PS+ are based on what ALL publishers (and indy devs) will accept.

Obviously we can see that indy devs are more willing to accept going onto PS+ immediately, because that's profitable with their cost base.

AAA games cannot do that, and that's why they don't put their newest games onto PS+.

The think with this PS Now is that I don't see why they can't also offer trophies, etc. for these old games.

Playing them on old consoles or emulators can't do that. 

That can raise the value of these games, and tie them into PS ecosystem.

I don't know if they're planning on doing that yet, but it kind of seems nuts not to.

Soooo, why was Bioshock Infinite put on PS+ so soon? And then how do you explain Gamefly? Your logic doesn't hold up.

Lol no you don't.

Like I wrote:

It's up to the publisher what goes on PS+, they cut a deal with Sony to get a certain cut.

If a AAA game is still selling heavily, they have little reason to, if it isn't selling well, then they might as well deal with PS+. 

I wasn't the one who framed the issue around a specific period of time delay, I expressed the issue as based on profits vs. cost base,

although you can GENERALIZE (not the same for every game) that it roughly corresponds to a certain period of time, on average.

Indies have much lower cost bases, that's why you see them going DIRECT to PS+ when that is almost unheard of for AAA titles.

If Sony really wanted to promote PS+, they could offer more $$$ to make it more worth to bring a more recent title to PS+.

I'm sure Gamefly is not ideal in eyes of many publishers. But nobody can stop them from renting discs out.

As far as DVDs, e.g. Netflix does deal with studios more to accomodate them re: time-line, but that is because

they are much more mass market and cannot reliably get sufficient stock if they don't have cooperation of the studios. 

They did not do so when they first started out.  Gaming is way more niche, and getting stock of games is easier.

He does realise that there are a whole host of games released over the last 2 years that will never be found in the charts again...

Anyways, I look forward to playing PS3 RPGs on my Vita. Not sure how compelling this would be for action titles.

Well that's just silly.

I mean first off... even if that was true, which I don't believe it is... I wouldn't call Playstations huge back catalog of games a joke.

Secondly, i'm going to guess Sony talked to publishers before they decided to announce and launch the thing. I mean that'd make sense right?


Third, really past the first 6 months, sales drop off a lot anyway... and the new people exposed to your game that wouldn't of bought it builds up attention and demand for your sequel/similar games.

It's basically the same effects as software piracy + Cash.