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

Forums - Sony Discussion - How Sony will respond Game Pass?

DPsx7 said:
JWeinCom said:

Yeah? That's kind of the point? Just like if I stop paying Netflix I don't get access to those movies anymore. As of now, save files can be used if I decide to buy the game outside of gamepass, so if I no longer find gamepass worth it, then I could buy whatever games I still care about and move on.

If it's important to me to have continued access to all the games I'm playing, then gamepass is not the way to go.

The point is to get locked into rising costs? I suppose if you have the saves then yeah you have some other option besides going cold turkey.

Well we were talking about MP not too long ago so you may want to keep access to certain games.

The point is that you pay for the service for a certain period of time at a certain rate. Once that period has expired, you can choose to sign up again at whatever the current rate is, or you can choose not to sign up. I don't see how anyone is locked into anything. 



Around the Network
JWeinCom said:
DPsx7 said:

The point is to get locked into rising costs? I suppose if you have the saves then yeah you have some other option besides going cold turkey.

Well we were talking about MP not too long ago so you may want to keep access to certain games.

The point is that you pay for the service for a certain period of time at a certain rate. Once that period has expired, you can choose to sign up again at whatever the current rate is, or you can choose not to sign up. I don't see how anyone is locked into anything. 

As with majority of subscriptions you have to opt out to get out - this is the case for GP where you continue to pay unless you cancel the sub. Which a lot of people neglect to do.

Granted some companies make this more of an hassle. Take cellphone companies for example. A lot of people also subscribe to so much stuff forget what subs they are paying for, which is what these companies want.



A few random thoughts:

-Some people say it's bad for developers. How do those of you feel about the "free" games given away by PS+ and GWG? At least with Game Pass, those AAA games are just temporarily on the market. You may buy it later. With the other services, if they give you a game, it's almost yours. They're not making any more money from you unless you buy DLC.

-At least one person said they still prefer digital because they can control their purchase. Remember the time people couldn't even play Heavy Rain on PS3 despite owning it physically? Physical is no guarantee of anything.

-Some ham would be pretty good right now. A nice ham and cheese sandwich...

My point is, even if you buy physically, there's just so much to download, so much to patch in, and DRM is so ingrained in modern hardware (2005-present), even if you buy physical, you're just buying digital with a disc in your hand. The world changed and we didn't even notice.

At this point, even with big games coming to Game Pass, it's still just a percentage. People will still gravitate towards retail or (like me) just buy digitally because they think they own the game that way.

We don't.

-One last thing: Attach rates. How many games does the average gamer buy? If you're like me (the way I used to be) you were buying multiple games a month. Awesome for the industry. I think gamers don't fall under that umbrella. If M$ can convince millions of those gamers who were spending $0 a month on nothing to spend $15 a month on something they weren't even interested in... 🤔



Game pass isn't even pro consumer, guess it is if you see the low sub price for a catalog of games. GAAS will never give you big budget games, it simply won't pay for it. In that sense to me it is not pro consumer, I would rather pay full price games that give me these experiences.



I don't feel that Sony needs to. Sony makes games worth paying for.



Around the Network
Random_Matt said:
Game pass isn't even pro consumer, guess it is if you see the low sub price for a catalog of games. GAAS will never give you big budget games, it simply won't pay for it. In that sense to me it is not pro consumer, I would rather pay full price games that give me these experiences.

Double edged sword.

On one hand, that means the big games get to sell for full price and make all the money they can. Despite having Game Pass Ultimate, I still buy the games I really want to play.

There's smaller games I'd never even consider but I've given them a shot on Game Pass. I assume they're making money somehow. Maybe a percentage based on how much traffic they bring to the service (like YouTube). Who knows?

There are certain games that come to Game Pass the exact same day they release on PS4 and Switch for MSRP (Streets of Rage 4, for example).

There actually are big AAA games for it. Gears 5 was one of the best games of 2019 and it was there before it could be bought in stores. Other big games end up on the service, too. Games like Doom, Devil May Cry 5, Outer Worlds, etc.

At the end of the month, you don't really have anything to show for your $15 besides some memories and some Achievement points but that goes for a lot of things in this life. They're selling us something without really selling us anything.



d21lewis said:

A few random thoughts:

-Some people say it's bad for developers. How do those of you feel about the "free" games given away by PS+ and GWG? At least with Game Pass, those AAA games are just temporarily on the market. You may buy it later. With the other services, if they give you a game, it's almost yours. They're not making any more money from you unless you buy DLC.
The games on Plus and Gold are very old and done most of the sales it could and still receives a pay from Sony plus some publicity that may or not give some leg (I have noticed a lot of these show up on promotion early before or after being given away), sad is that the Indie games given away aren`t even downloaded by most subscribers.
-At least one person said they still prefer digital because they can control their purchase. Remember the time people couldn't even play Heavy Rain on PS3 despite owning it physically? Physical is no guarantee of anything.
I don`t remember this case, every game I had I could play without ever linking to the internet. Please the source, I got curious.
-Some ham would be pretty good right now. A nice ham and cheese sandwich...

My point is, even if you buy physically, there's just so much to download, so much to patch in, and DRM is so ingrained in modern hardware (2005-present), even if you buy physical, you're just buying digital with a disc in your hand. The world changed and we didn't even notice.
Still can play all of those even without any patch or anything of the like.
At this point, even with big games coming to Game Pass, it's still just a percentage. People will still gravitate towards retail or (like me) just buy digitally because they think they own the game that way.

We don't.

-One last thing: Attach rates. How many games does the average gamer buy? If you're like me (the way I used to be) you were buying multiple games a month. Awesome for the industry. I think gamers don't fall under that umbrella. If M$ can convince millions of those gamers who were spending $0 a month on nothing to spend $15 a month on something they weren't even interested in... 🤔

We know on average a console have like 12SW sold per HW sold, and since there are plenty of guys like us who buy like 12 games a year then there is also those that perhaps buy a CoD or Fifa per year and nothing else. So yes if GP is made in a way that it doesn`t take away from current market but make people that weren`t expending money to expend that would be good. In a way it is similar to Sony introducing plus, at first when it only gave games away and discount it had 1-2M subs (3% attach ratio), but when it got mandatory it rose to like 40%. So we have to wait to see how things will turn out. I just am very against this making the industry go towards the GAAS and MP model.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

d21lewis said:
Random_Matt said:
Game pass isn't even pro consumer, guess it is if you see the low sub price for a catalog of games. GAAS will never give you big budget games, it simply won't pay for it. In that sense to me it is not pro consumer, I would rather pay full price games that give me these experiences.

Double edged sword.

On one hand, that means the big games get to sell for full price and make all the money they can. Despite having Game Pass Ultimate, I still buy the games I really want to play.

There's smaller games I'd never even consider but I've given them a shot on Game Pass. I assume they're making money somehow. Maybe a percentage based on how much traffic they bring to the service (like YouTube). Who knows?

There are certain games that come to Game Pass the exact same day they release on PS4 and Switch for MSRP (Streets of Rage 4, for example).

There actually are big AAA games for it. Gears 5 was one of the best games of 2019 and it was there before it could be bought in stores. Other big games end up on the service, too. Games like Doom, Devil May Cry 5, Outer Worlds, etc.

At the end of the month, you don't really have anything to show for your $15 besides some memories and some Achievement points but that goes for a lot of things in this life. They're selling us something without really selling us anything.

The only problem is that we can`t really measure the impact of GP, if MS gave the sales number of Gears 5 it would help us to see if being on GP day one impacted the sales of the game in anyway.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

DonFerrari said:
d21lewis said:

A few random thoughts:

-Some people say it's bad for developers. How do those of you feel about the "free" games given away by PS+ and GWG? At least with Game Pass, those AAA games are just temporarily on the market. You may buy it later. With the other services, if they give you a game, it's almost yours. They're not making any more money from you unless you buy DLC.
The games on Plus and Gold are very old and done most of the sales it could and still receives a pay from Sony plus some publicity that may or not give some leg (I have noticed a lot of these show up on promotion early before or after being given away), sad is that the Indie games given away aren`t even downloaded by most subscribers.
-At least one person said they still prefer digital because they can control their purchase. Remember the time people couldn't even play Heavy Rain on PS3 despite owning it physically? Physical is no guarantee of anything.
I don`t remember this case, every game I had I could play without ever linking to the internet. Please the source, I got curious.
-Some ham would be pretty good right now. A nice ham and cheese sandwich...

My point is, even if you buy physically, there's just so much to download, so much to patch in, and DRM is so ingrained in modern hardware (2005-present), even if you buy physical, you're just buying digital with a disc in your hand. The world changed and we didn't even notice.
Still can play all of those even without any patch or anything of the like.
At this point, even with big games coming to Game Pass, it's still just a percentage. People will still gravitate towards retail or (like me) just buy digitally because they think they own the game that way.

We don't.

-One last thing: Attach rates. How many games does the average gamer buy? If you're like me (the way I used to be) you were buying multiple games a month. Awesome for the industry. I think gamers don't fall under that umbrella. If M$ can convince millions of those gamers who were spending $0 a month on nothing to spend $15 a month on something they weren't even interested in... 🤔

We know on average a console have like 12SW sold per HW sold, and since there are plenty of guys like us who buy like 12 games a year then there is also those that perhaps buy a CoD or Fifa per year and nothing else. So yes if GP is made in a way that it doesn`t take away from current market but make people that weren`t expending money to expend that would be good. In a way it is similar to Sony introducing plus, at first when it only gave games away and discount it had 1-2M subs (3% attach ratio), but when it got mandatory it rose to like 40%. So we have to wait to see how things will turn out. I just am very against this making the industry go towards the GAAS and MP model.

https://v1.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.251206-Who-remembers-the-ApocalyPS3

This was the closest I could find. Almost like it was scrubbed from history! There was also another incident where the PSN was down for like a month. I thought THAT was the "ApocalyPS3" but I guess I was mistaken.

Also there are certain games that you buy in store but only get part of the content. There's a Tony Hawk game that's only a few GB on the disc but you have to download the rest. Games like Resident Evil Revelations 1&2, Overwatch, etc on the Switch gives you half the game on the card and you have to download the other. There are even games you buy physically and only get a download code in the box.



They'll probably build on PSNOW and try to make that service as good as gamepass