By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - You have it Backwards, Playstation NOW leads above Xbox GamePass

Pretty sure the only reason MS is doing day one games on game pass is because with their current cycle of games, they make more money. If they increase their yearly output, they'd start losing money. It's currently 120 per year, so if they release 2 AAA games in one year, and the average subscriber played them both, they would probably lose money right there because if they have 3rd party games on it, they'll need to pay those publishers something. I wouldn't be surprised if they dropped the day one rule for next gen.



Around the Network
Bofferbrauer2 said:
forevercloud3000 said:

My point is GamePass purpose is to eventually lead into Streaming(to be on more than just Xbox) which PSNow has beaten it to the punch in that regard. Not to mention, Sony added the ability to directly download a large portion of the games just like XB1 so that is a moot point.

The quality disparity could def be a big factor...but I question how much.  As Sony just said in their Keynote they had a week ago, average consumers do not look at games in pixel ratios. Sure, they latch on to the buzz words but mostly they just want to be able to have the experience for the cheapest and most unhindered.  Most of the kids playing on PC are using dated monitors and hardware by Elite Pro standards. Phones and Switch also are not sporting 4K visuals and why would they need to? People will go with what has more of perceived value, usually quality vs Price. 

PSNow can be the inferior performing streaming service....but if it is the service with more games and more exclusives on the devices that people predominantly own......then it can maintain it's lead. Not to mention no matter what MS does, their service will not have Sony exclusives which are likely a service seller and decider.

As had been said by others before, you're comparing apples to oranges here. Gamepass is never intended to become a streaming service; that's Xcloud's job. It's also the one Microsoft called the Netflix for games, not Gamepass. The rumored digital-only Xbox One will probably come with just that, meaning it will be an Xbox branded streaming box comparable to the Playstation TV. It's also probably xCloud, and not Gamepass, that will make it onto the Switch.

So nope, Gamepass is a game download subscription service and thus comparing it to a streaming service and considering the lack of streaming the killing feature is just plain wrong. Let's see how xCloud will work out and then we can compare it to PSNow, as that would make much more sense. Main difference between the two apart from the game library will probably be that xCloud will bring the newest Xbox games while Sony waits a couple years before bringing it's newest games to their service.

About consumers not looking at game pixel ratios, that's true... but they probably remember the shiny pictures from trailers and the like and will wonder why it looks much worse ingame.

 

As an anecdote,or me personally, neither xCloud or PSNow would be good for me. I tried PSNow, but streaming games just isn't for me, which would mean Gamepass would win by default since it's something different entirely.

I am not the only one even in this thread theorizing that "Project xCloud" is just a facet of Gamepass or they will be one in the same when it is all said and done.

If not part of some sort of subscription how are you imagining Cloud gaming to work?

Are you thinking Cloud version as a seperate sku to sell to consumers? Similar to how there is Physical and Digital, then maybe Cloud version.

I find that highly unlikely. 

PSNow offers Streaming and Download where applicable (mostly PS4 titles).  So the service has XCloud/Gamepass on both fronts.

I think some of you are jumping the gun thinking that MS(or Sony) by some miraculous reason is going to convince 3rd parties to jump fully on board to have their games on any Sub service. If they can't get a ton on for localized distribution via stream, how are they suppose to do cloud distribution? I just don't forsee the number of contributors being larger than what we already know to exist on current Gamepass/PSNow. It might grow over time, but that time will likely be long, in which Sony has plenty of time to build up their server strength. This is speaking as if this is really suppose to take any sizable chunk from traditional locally processed gaming. 

I keep hearing "But MS has Day 1 Games". THAT IS ONLY THEIR FIRST PARTY! Which is easily argued the weakest distributor of games out of the big three. That is not the huge selling point unless their quality and appeal step up big time or 3rd Party support Day 1 releases on the service.

About the Graphical Fidelity: I would also add that if MS taught us anything, all you have to do is have the most powerful console on the market as an option, and everyone will start toting your brand as the definitive....even if it is only on a very select model or path.  The PS4 models are superior to all XB1 models except the X....but now all the commercials say "Best on Xbox One" and gamers followed suit....even though XB1X makes up the smallest percentage of Xbox Ones out there. I will also say that gamers are at least partially aware that certain conveniences come with caveats. You know when playing Fortnite on your Smartphone you are not going to get it at the best of quality, but you don't care because you want to alleviate your bordom in class. Every console gamer knows that PC capabilities out strip what is possible on console but they aim for convenience of use, budget pricing, and game selection. Streaming is no different, you have to go into streaming understanding it will always have limitations(even xcloud) and those who stress over wireless controller latency will never be satisfied with that.....but they are not the market.

 

And me personally, I don't want Stream based gaming either. I have never had very consistent internet and abhor the idea of needing to be tethered constantly to play my games. My general thought is what happens when the internet goes out? All of a sudden my console becomes a paper weight.  Still....if we are talking about Streaming Gaming services of the future Sony is the one in the lead currently because they are the only one with anything fully implemented. And I am calling into question whether MS can even steal that from them regardless of superior tech.



      

      

      

Greatness Awaits

PSN:Forevercloud (looking for Soul Sacrifice Partners!!!)

Tried Game Pass, mostly old gen and mediocre first party.



forevercloud3000 said:
Soundwave said:

Sony is going to get trampled, if not by MS, by Amazon or Google. 

If buying your way into the gaming industry cemented you a spot MS would have won a generation already. It doesn't matter that new competitors are larger. Nintendo has survived much bigger companies than it and Sony is no less savvy.

Which much bigger companies than MicroSoft , Amazon & Google exactly?



forevercloud3000 said:
zorg1000 said:
Probably because Game Pass has certain games the same day they release, that's about the only major difference I can think of.

I mean that would be an awesome bullet point....if they were games the caliber of what Sony and Nintendo produce. So far GamePass has seen what? Sea of Thieves, State of Decay 2, Crackdown 3 Day and Date. Games that didn't perform well review or perception wise. Sea of Thieves from what I understand could make a comeback tho.

 

Did it get Forza? Will it get Gear of War 5? Will it get Halo Infinite?  I question how far they will take the "1st Party Games Day One" rule. Doing so could really cripple some well performing title's sales at retail.

It reminds me of when Sony first started doing Free games with Plus subscription. It was all fun and games until when the PS4 came out they saw a drop in lesser AA title sales because everyone was like "Oh, it will end up on Plus for free so I won't buy it". I think Sony facetiously didn't put many games as Plus titles (Like Knack for the longest) just to break that mindset.

It’s not just Microsoft games that show up on GamePass on day one. They strike deals with various companies to bring their games day one. Mutant Year Zero, Ashen, Below, just to name a recent few. It also just got the newest Tomb Raider. It also has Fallout 4 and Doom. There’s not only support from MS’s own games day one, they get much better third party support.

Theres also the fact that GamePass allowed downloads from the start, Sony only started allowing downloads after GamePass launches, and only for PS4 titles. Everything else you have to stream, and in my experience the streaming on PSNow is doodoo. Plus it’s overpriced. Chalk that up as another reason people might be more excited for Microsoft’s cloud service, they’re much better and more prepared for it. 

Lastly Microsoft actually markets GamePass. Sony doesn’t seem to give a shit if people know about PSNow. 



Around the Network
Conina said:
forevercloud3000 said:

If buying your way into the gaming industry cemented you a spot MS would have won a generation already. It doesn't matter that new competitors are larger. Nintendo has survived much bigger companies than it and Sony is no less savvy.

Which much bigger companies than MicroSoft , Amazon & Google exactly?

I'm not sure why you're asking this question. I think you misread. He said that "Nintendo has survived much bigger companies than it", which is true. And that Sony is no less savvy than Nintendo.



- "If you have the heart of a true winner, you can always get more pissed off than some other asshole."

forevercloud3000 said:
Bofferbrauer2 said:

As had been said by others before, you're comparing apples to oranges here. Gamepass is never intended to become a streaming service; that's Xcloud's job. It's also the one Microsoft called the Netflix for games, not Gamepass. The rumored digital-only Xbox One will probably come with just that, meaning it will be an Xbox branded streaming box comparable to the Playstation TV. It's also probably xCloud, and not Gamepass, that will make it onto the Switch.

So nope, Gamepass is a game download subscription service and thus comparing it to a streaming service and considering the lack of streaming the killing feature is just plain wrong. Let's see how xCloud will work out and then we can compare it to PSNow, as that would make much more sense. Main difference between the two apart from the game library will probably be that xCloud will bring the newest Xbox games while Sony waits a couple years before bringing it's newest games to their service.

About consumers not looking at game pixel ratios, that's true... but they probably remember the shiny pictures from trailers and the like and will wonder why it looks much worse ingame.

 

As an anecdote,or me personally, neither xCloud or PSNow would be good for me. I tried PSNow, but streaming games just isn't for me, which would mean Gamepass would win by default since it's something different entirely.

I am not the only one even in this thread theorizing that "Project xCloud" is just a facet of Gamepass or they will be one in the same when it is all said and done.

If not part of some sort of subscription how are you imagining Cloud gaming to work?

Are you thinking Cloud version as a seperate sku to sell to consumers? Similar to how there is Physical and Digital, then maybe Cloud version.

I find that highly unlikely. 

PSNow offers Streaming and Download where applicable (mostly PS4 titles).  So the service has XCloud/Gamepass on both fronts.

I think some of you are jumping the gun thinking that MS(or Sony) by some miraculous reason is going to convince 3rd parties to jump fully on board to have their games on any Sub service. If they can't get a ton on for localized distribution via stream, how are they suppose to do cloud distribution? I just don't forsee the number of contributors being larger than what we already know to exist on current Gamepass/PSNow. It might grow over time, but that time will likely be long, in which Sony has plenty of time to build up their server strength. This is speaking as if this is really suppose to take any sizable chunk from traditional locally processed gaming. 

I keep hearing "But MS has Day 1 Games". THAT IS ONLY THEIR FIRST PARTY! Which is easily argued the weakest distributor of games out of the big three. That is not the huge selling point unless their quality and appeal step up big time or 3rd Party support Day 1 releases on the service.

About the Graphical Fidelity: I would also add that if MS taught us anything, all you have to do is have the most powerful console on the market as an option, and everyone will start toting your brand as the definitive....even if it is only on a very select model or path.  The PS4 models are superior to all XB1 models except the X....but now all the commercials say "Best on Xbox One" and gamers followed suit....even though XB1X makes up the smallest percentage of Xbox Ones out there. I will also say that gamers are at least partially aware that certain conveniences come with caveats. You know when playing Fortnite on your Smartphone you are not going to get it at the best of quality, but you don't care because you want to alleviate your bordom in class. Every console gamer knows that PC capabilities out strip what is possible on console but they aim for convenience of use, budget pricing, and game selection. Streaming is no different, you have to go into streaming understanding it will always have limitations(even xcloud) and those who stress over wireless controller latency will never be satisfied with that.....but they are not the market.

 

And me personally, I don't want Stream based gaming either. I have never had very consistent internet and abhor the idea of needing to be tethered constantly to play my games. My general thought is what happens when the internet goes out? All of a sudden my console becomes a paper weight.  Still....if we are talking about Streaming Gaming services of the future Sony is the one in the lead currently because they are the only one with anything fully implemented. And I am calling into question whether MS can even steal that from them regardless of superior tech.

@bolded parts: They are already into this, and also quite a few of them already release the same day at retail, Xbox game store and Gamepass. And even if they didn't: XBO games day one on Gamepass is still miles ahead of PS4 games added 3 years after release.



COKTOE said:
Conina said:

Which much bigger companies than MicroSoft , Amazon & Google exactly?

I'm not sure why you're asking this question. I think you misread. He said that "Nintendo has survived much bigger companies than it", which is true. And that Sony is no less savvy than Nintendo.

I think you're not understanding what he means. Microsoft, Apple, Alphabet (which is the holding company of Google) and Amazon are the 4 biggest companies in the world, so Nintendo surviving bigger than Microsoft is hardly possible simply because there ain't much bigger than Microsoft.

I know you (and the original poster) meant bigger as more successful Videogame/console companies like Sega, but the wording was such that it meant bigger in general, and like I said, there's just not much bigger then Microsoft.



Conina said:
forevercloud3000 said:

If buying your way into the gaming industry cemented you a spot MS would have won a generation already. It doesn't matter that new competitors are larger. Nintendo has survived much bigger companies than it and Sony is no less savvy.

Which much bigger companies than MicroSoft , Amazon & Google exactly?

I think he meant Nintendo has survived much bigger companies than itself, could be wrong but that's what it sounds like to me.



When the herd loses its way, the shepard must kill the bull that leads them astray.

Bofferbrauer2 said:
COKTOE said:

I'm not sure why you're asking this question. I think you misread. He said that "Nintendo has survived much bigger companies than it", which is true. And that Sony is no less savvy than Nintendo.

I think you're not understanding what he means. Microsoft, Apple, Alphabet (which is the holding company of Google) and Amazon are the 4 biggest companies in the world, so Nintendo surviving bigger than Microsoft is hardly possible simply because there ain't much bigger than Microsoft.

I know you (and the original poster) meant bigger as more successful Videogame/console companies like Sega, but the wording was such that it meant bigger in general, and like I said, there's just not much bigger then Microsoft.

 



- "If you have the heart of a true winner, you can always get more pissed off than some other asshole."