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

DonFerrari said:
Two curious things, the suggestion that devs pay to be on gamepass (seem this throw in one thread) or that they offer to put it for free on GP to get publicity (done here), last I heard publishers liked to receive for people to play their games not to pay for MS to profit from it.

Another curiosity is Gamepass have like 100 games on it? In 6 years of PS+ I have received at least more than 100 games permanently (considering my library says I have over 350 digital games and certainly didn`t buy more than 50, that is actually 300 tiles received some way or another without paying for it specifically). So PS+ and PSNow already do most of what GP offers.

I haven't thought about that before. Being loyal to Sony has also gave me tons of brilliant big games. And it's full ownership.

Nintendo on the other hand is the one that should be asked how they will respond? Not that they need to respond, but Nintendo ownership is truly the most expensive affair of the big 3 and I don't know of any loyalty/subscription on Nintendo that really gives out good stuff.

I was checking the prices of Zelda switch agains games like Horizon, God of War and many others and it is a shame how pricey Zelda is. The excuse some give me is always that Nintendo makes quality games that deserve the long term high price - it's like God of War and co are not quality games.

Last edited by 0D0 - on 31 July 2020

God bless You.

My Total Sales prediction for PS4 by the end of 2021: 110m+

When PS4 will hit 100m consoles sold: Before Christmas 2019

There were three ravens sat on a tree / They were as blacke as they might be / The one of them said to his mate, Where shall we our breakfast take?


Around the Network
0D0 said:
DonFerrari said:
Two curious things, the suggestion that devs pay to be on gamepass (seem this throw in one thread) or that they offer to put it for free on GP to get publicity (done here), last I heard publishers liked to receive for people to play their games not to pay for MS to profit from it.

Another curiosity is Gamepass have like 100 games on it? In 6 years of PS+ I have received at least more than 100 games permanently (considering my library says I have over 350 digital games and certainly didn`t buy more than 50, that is actually 300 tiles received some way or another without paying for it specifically). So PS+ and PSNow already do most of what GP offers.

I haven't thought about that before. Being loyal to Sony has also gave me tons of brilliant big games. And it's full ownership.

Nintendo on the other hand is the one that should be asked how they will respond? Not that they need to respond, but Nintendo ownership is truly the most expensive affair of the big 3 and I don't know of any loyalty/subscription on Nintendo that really gives out good stuff.

I was checking the prices of Zelda switch agains games like Horizon, God of War and many others and it is a shame how pricey Zelda is. The excuse some give me is always that Nintendo makes quality games that deserve the long term high price - it's like God of War and co are not quality games.

No. It's not full ownership. The closest thing to full ownership from a subscription service is when you get backwards compatible 360 games on Xbox Live Gold. The games you get from PS+ are locked the second your subscription expires.

And while both Gold and PS+ give you "free" games every month, you get 100+ instantly on Game Pass and many of them are top tier new releases. Many times I've purchased a game early only for it to arrive on Gamepass before I even get around to playing it. Certain games are only there for a limited time, though. 

I guess the question (at least for me) is "how many games do you really need?". I'll pay for Game Pass Ultimate and only play one single game for an entire month...



mZuzek loves to pre-order

d21lewis said:
0D0 said:

I haven't thought about that before. Being loyal to Sony has also gave me tons of brilliant big games. And it's full ownership.

Nintendo on the other hand is the one that should be asked how they will respond? Not that they need to respond, but Nintendo ownership is truly the most expensive affair of the big 3 and I don't know of any loyalty/subscription on Nintendo that really gives out good stuff.

I was checking the prices of Zelda switch agains games like Horizon, God of War and many others and it is a shame how pricey Zelda is. The excuse some give me is always that Nintendo makes quality games that deserve the long term high price - it's like God of War and co are not quality games.

No. It's not full ownership. The closest thing to full ownership from a subscription service is when you get backwards compatible 360 games on Xbox Live Gold. The games you get from PS+ are locked the second your subscription expires.

And while both Gold and PS+ give you "free" games every month, you get 100+ instantly on Game Pass and many of them are top tier new releases. Many times I've purchased a game early only for it to arrive on Gamepass before I even get around to playing it. Certain games are only there for a limited time, though. 

I guess the question (at least for me) is "how many games do you really need?". I'll pay for Game Pass Ultimate and only play one single game for an entire month...

Yep you can`t really say 100% ownership since you need you subscription valid to play them. But well different from streaming services that if the game isn`t on their current list you can`t play the plus and gold games you have then even after they expire from the offer. So it is kinda middle ground. And of course there is a difference between instant library of GP and my cummulative gifts from plus.



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

Gamepass is the biggest scam in gaming. And MS last-ditch attempt to derail gaming in general and turn everything into a GaaS hybrid.

How can people not see this?

Gamepass is not some pro-consumer feature MS is doing because they love gamers, its what they have decided to do because they believe they cannot flat out compete with sony anymore. Does anyone here really think Gamepas would have games on it on launch day if MS could have pushed 5-10M sales of any of their mainline IPs consistently?

Like how stupid people really? can't they see where this is going? Get emin for $1/month as a deal for what should b $10/month. Then when they are all in, start hiking prices. Just wait until there is a gamepass ultimate where you have to pay $30/month if you want to get the bigger third party IPs day one. Oh, and lets not forget that blog post that will talk about how they regrettably have to increase the price of the service because there are so many great games that they want to offer their gamers "for free".



Sorry, DP.



Around the Network
Intrinsic said:
Gamepass is the biggest scam in gaming. And MS last-ditch attempt to derail gaming in general and turn everything into a GaaS hybrid.

How can people not see this?

Gamepass is not some pro-consumer feature MS is doing because they love gamers, its what they have decided to do because they believe they cannot flat out compete with sony anymore. Does anyone here really think Gamepas would have games on it on launch day if MS could have pushed 5-10M sales of any of their mainline IPs consistently?

Like how stupid people really? can't they see where this is going? Get emin for $1/month as a deal for what should b $10/month. Then when they are all in, start hiking prices. Just wait until there is a gamepass ultimate where you have to pay $30/month if you want to get the bigger third party IPs day one. Oh, and lets not forget that blog post that will talk about how they regrettably have to increase the price of the service because there are so many great games that they want to offer their gamers "for free".

Of course? I mean, that's how business work. It's easier to sell you on a product/service if they are cheaper at first. Once the product/service is proven and it has a better pedigree/brand recognition, you can actually start charging an amount that actually makes you money.

MS is really behind Nintendo and Sony in terms of, well everything. So yes, going third party by releasing their games on PC and some on Switch, coupled with services like Gamepass and XCloud was their answer to make the brand Xbox profitable.It's how they choose to survive.



My (locked) thread about how difficulty should be a decision for the developers, not the gamers.

https://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=241866&page=1

Intrinsic said:
Gamepass is the biggest scam in gaming. And MS last-ditch attempt to derail gaming in general and turn everything into a GaaS hybrid.

How can people not see this?

Gamepass is not some pro-consumer feature MS is doing because they love gamers, its what they have decided to do because they believe they cannot flat out compete with sony anymore. Does anyone here really think Gamepas would have games on it on launch day if MS could have pushed 5-10M sales of any of their mainline IPs consistently?

Like how stupid people really? can't they see where this is going? Get emin for $1/month as a deal for what should b $10/month. Then when they are all in, start hiking prices. Just wait until there is a gamepass ultimate where you have to pay $30/month if you want to get the bigger third party IPs day one. Oh, and lets not forget that blog post that will talk about how they regrettably have to increase the price of the service because there are so many great games that they want to offer their gamers "for free".

My thoughts exactly.



Intrinsic said:
Gamepass is the biggest scam in gaming. And MS last-ditch attempt to derail gaming in general and turn everything into a GaaS hybrid.

How can people not see this?

Gamepass is not some pro-consumer feature MS is doing because they love gamers, its what they have decided to do because they believe they cannot flat out compete with sony anymore. Does anyone here really think Gamepas would have games on it on launch day if MS could have pushed 5-10M sales of any of their mainline IPs consistently?

Like how stupid people really? can't they see where this is going? Get emin for $1/month as a deal for what should b $10/month. Then when they are all in, start hiking prices. Just wait until there is a gamepass ultimate where you have to pay $30/month if you want to get the bigger third party IPs day one. Oh, and lets not forget that blog post that will talk about how they regrettably have to increase the price of the service because there are so many great games that they want to offer their gamers "for free".

If they hike the price, then you stop using the service. If it's successful, there will be competitors.

Something can be good for a company and also be good for consumers. 



They might be able to get away with a lower price if they make up for it with volume. But regardless it's not for me because I don't have a high level of trust in digital/streaming platforms. It's not saving us money by locking customers into a subscription. I prefer to pay once, get my disc, then the control is in my hands from then on.



JWeinCom said:

If they hike the price, then you stop using the service. If it's successful, there will be competitors.

Something can be good for a company and also be good for consumers. 

Enh, be careful with that. If you invest money into the library and they jack the price you're gonna either have to suck it up or lose access to everything.