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?

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."

Around the Network
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.



Twitter: @d21lewis

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



d21lewis said:
DonFerrari said:

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.

Well that doesn't have much to do with physical or digital, but it is such an odd thing, didn't heard it before, cool.

PSN yes I do remember the 1 month or so blackout.

And yes a lot of Switch games aren't full games on media, but in PS4 I think only 1 or 2 games I bought was like that.

But I'll agree with you that even on physical media we have been going a road of less ownership and that is regretable.



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."

DPsx7 said:
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.

I played 20 games on GP in 2019 alone. Played it, beat it, uninstalled, moved on to the next. I like to think I very much saved money playing 20 games for $15 a month. Games included day 1 Gears 5 and Outer Worlds (both $60 value at the time). 

Im sorry but this is a bad argument. Fear mongering and “what if” witch-hunts at its worst. 



Xbox: Best hardware, Game Pass best value, best BC, more 1st party genres and multiplayer titles. 

 

Around the Network
DPsx7 said:
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.

I’m like 90% sure your save data is in tact. You just lose the game. You can buy at a 10% discount via GP if you fear it going away before you are done with it. Or wait for a mega sale. GP users can and still buy games. I myself bought Resident Evil 2 not long ago. GP doesn’t have everything. 



Xbox: Best hardware, Game Pass best value, best BC, more 1st party genres and multiplayer titles. 

 

DPsx7 said:
JWeinCom said:

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. 

It's like this. You buy the console and a pass. If the pass goes up in price and you don't like it now you have a console and nothing to play. It's not a paperweight as you can still go out and buy retail games, but if you're gonna do that you might as well skip the pass entirely.

Dunno if people who sub to a lot of things just don't worry about it. Whatever.

Well, first, you don't have to buy a console to get Gamepass, as it's available for PC. Secondly, as you said, if I stop the service I still have a console. And I have already enjoyed the benefit of gamepass for the time I chose to use it. At this point I can sell the machine, or I can buy the games I really enjoyed, which will likely by this point have dropped substantially in price.

Again, I'm fully aware going in that I don't have access to the game forever. I'm also aware the price may rise (although if they jumped it too suddenly I imagine they'd risk a class action suit). Based on my purchasing and playing habits though, (I mostly play Nintendo games and a buy like 3-4 third party titles a year, pretty much all of which have come to Gamepass), this is a far better deal for me. If after 2-3 years I'm no longer using the service, I'll probably still be coming out ahead compared to what I would have spent if I'd had bought all the games I played individually. 



sales2099 said:
DPsx7 said:
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.

I played 20 games on GP in 2019 alone. Played it, beat it, uninstalled, moved on to the next. I like to think I very much saved money playing 20 games for $15 a month. Games included day 1 Gears 5 and Outer Worlds (both $60 value at the time). 

Im sorry but this is a bad argument. Fear mongering and “what if” witch-hunts at its worst. 

Don't know all the games you played and how they would have costed if you waited for them to be cheaper. But let's say 15 per month on a year would equate 4 full games, you played 5x more so unless you waited a very long time (15*12/20 = 9 bucks per game) and perhaps some of those games you wouldn't have bought because they weren't good, it is very hard to say didn't save a lot of money or enjoyed a lot of your time.

Sure on the same note I have purchased hundred of physical, got 300 digital (mostly gifts from plus) and perhaps that costed me a little over double what you are paying per month and all those games are either mine forever (the ones I care) or as long as I keep or whenever I renew my sub.

Now doing maths, let's say the average attach ratio of games on Xbox is 12 games per HW bought over 6 years of ownership, that is 60*12 = 720 USD at most (because there is some bought on sales), at the same time person paying 15 bucks per month over same period would be 15*72 =1080 USD (sure there will be some promotions), so yes at 15 per month math kinda balances out and gives MS some leverage (sure we also would have to excludes people that pay one month sub and play that game or 2 or 3 in the month and then quit, which could likely mean for the month that game release instead of getting 60 they got 15 for that game, but for the over 1 year game for third parties they would hardly be losing money, they get some bucks for the game on the platform that they aren't getting from stores, get some publicity that may extend legs for that game, etc). So if MS releases about 4 games per year on the service it basically equals the expenditure buying and subs if someone keeps their sub the whole year.

All in all, it certainly can be made a model where it is profitable to keep GP, it doesn't jeopardize other publishers and all.

But you can't deny that there is also the potential for MS to focus on more episodic games (let's say put a part of the game each month for some months or like a year), for eternal games that get those weekly or monthly update (like smartphone games, and some are very good and fun), F2P models on some other games and MP heavy where the people keep playing the same game for a long period? That is basically the reason I don't want Sony to follow same route since I like contained SP games. Also they were able make 3 games that sell 10M almost every year this gen so that would basically be similar revenue to MS having the subs without having to send part of that money to anyone else. But yep Sony could put those games after 1 or 2 years on PSNow and improve that service to generate more recurrent revenue together with PS+. We will see if Sony will respond when GP grows and bring more profit. Denying the model can be profitable and have quality is wrong imho though.

Last edited by DonFerrari - on 01 August 2020

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."

I think some of these arguments trying to paint GP as some bad deal are pretty weird.
I do agree that maybe the quality of the 1st party output might decline, or that these games might adopt more GaaS like properties, but that's not a given of course.

At best I can see Sony offering their F2P games (PSNow does offer streaming after all and on devices not the PS5), their MP only titles (e.g 'TloU Factions') or the competitive MP if their narrative games (e.g. UC MP and not UC SP) day 1 (and permanently).

But as always, it makes little financial sense for them to do this for their AAA budget games, especially considering how well their IP's are beginning to sell.



DPsx7 said:
sales2099 said:

I played 20 games on GP in 2019 alone. Played it, beat it, uninstalled, moved on to the next. I like to think I very much saved money playing 20 games for $15 a month. Games included day 1 Gears 5 and Outer Worlds (both $60 value at the time). 

Im sorry but this is a bad argument. Fear mongering and “what if” witch-hunts at its worst. 

Since it's essentially a rental program you're probably not playing bigger/longer games or not getting a huge variety. Sacrifices are made for the money you think you're saving. And hey if you have no complaints then whatever. It's not like M$ hasn't done bad things for the market before.

... like... what? For argument's sake, we'll call this a rental program. Why would that mean you can't rent a long game? I used Gamefly for a while, and I played a mix of long games and short games. I didn't feel the need to limit myself to short games, because it was cheap enough, and I didn't feel any compulsion to focus on shorter games to get more bang for my buck, cause that would be kind of weird. With Gamepass, since you don't have to return a game before you can get a new one, there's even less incentive to avoid lengthy games. As for variety, there's plenty of variety on Gamepass. Look at the list yourself.

This kind of seems to be scraping the bottom of the barrel. Also, the use of M$ is frowned upon. A normal S will be fine.