Keep in mind it is 20% of a gaming forum population. Outside it, the number would probably fall to 2%.

I suspect that a great majority of people prefers playing games from 2015 than games from 2005. It is a nice service to have, but I doubt Sony will be making much profit.

No not immediately interested in subscribing. Clearly my gaming priority is on current gen games, and PS Now is all about exploring the back catalogue of previous gen (or B list current gen) games. That means a PS Now service has limited interest to only those periods of tie where I am in between current gen games. That means single game rentals on an irregular basis. And that only when I've run out of indies and back catalogue current gen games that I've perma-rented through PS+.

Of course it has to come to New Zealand before I can decide not to subscribe to it.

Truth is we don't really know for sure at all. And this is only in the US to start but will support PS3, PS4, Vita, Sony and other TV as well as Android. You start to run into a situation where the potential becomes to high not to be profitable.  

My prediction   (based on comments on the blog) is that this will be a trickle effect where you each month as titles are added, more and more people jump on. With the promised addition of PS1 and PS2 titles,  this service will become essential to some. I predict that it will be very profitable. 

I've already played most of the games that interest me on the service so there is little reason to subscribe.

Instead I would just pay for access to individual titles.

I'm interested in the service, but I can't afford those rates.

It's because TV shows and Movies aren't latency sensitive. For example, Netflix will often stream video siganls a full minute in advance or more. This buffer means you almost always get smooth video playback, even with rocky internet connections.

Streaming games is a completely differnt story. Not only must you cut down your buffer to a small fraction of a second, but your server also needs to take time to respond to your controller inputs (by comparison, Netflix is only streaming data 1 way. Game streaming requires 2-way data flow.)

And even if you could get your buffer down to a respectable 100ms, and have a perfectly stable connection, and ignore the worsened image quality, that 100ms delay is still very significant and will make many games unplayable.

Not interested at the moment might change my mind once they add a lot more games.

I guess it may just be my area, but I have never had any issue with latency on PS Now. I have consistanly 10ms or below ping/latency on the modem side, and my Bravia only has 17ms input lag. Even with my Comcast modem I never had any issues, and that was with 40 - 50ms ping.

This seems like something that only hardcore gamers are going to be concerned with. I see the average consumer not noticing much if any difference. I also think the core gamer will see no issue once they try the service. DS4 has less input lag than DS3 did, and new TV's are much better with lag than older LCD's. Plus it always amazes me seeing people playing games with LCD's that are in cinema mode, that alone makes me think that the average madden, call of duty dude bros will not even notice a difference.

I have a big ps3 backlog so there's no point. If I ever get through it and I might not because ps plus ads nearly more than I can play I'll consider it.

That's a lot less latency than I expected. I was basing the latency times on my experience with Remote Play (Which I assume PS Now uses similar technology/software for). Maybe I'll try it sometime.

Also, I think another reason people are against PS Now (or other rental services) is due to the fact that games have progression, whereas movies don't. When you watch a movie, you can pretty much watch it once and you'll be satisfied, even if the right to watch that movie is taken away later. But most video games have you making progression, and losing the game means losing that progression.