From an IGN article (citing GamesIndustry.Biz), Sony Interactive Entertainment CEO Jim Ryan claims that Sony won't put high profile 1st Party games on streaming service day one because budgets are too high and the model is not "sustainable."

"For us, having a catalogue of games is not something that defines a platform," Ryan told GamesIndustry.Biz. "Our pitch, as you've heard, is 'new games, great games.' We have had this conversation before -- we are not going to go down the road of putting new releases titles into a subscription model. These games cost many millions of dollars, well over $100 million, to develop. We just don't see that as sustainable."

https://www.ign.com/articles/sony-wont-put-its-new-first-party-games-on-a-subscription-service-because-its-not-sustainable

I think most of us understood this but it is nice for them to clarify their position. Obviously Microsoft disagrees with their approach to Gamepass. It's up to Microsoft to prove this is a sustainable/profitable model. Only time will tell.

What do you think?

"These games cost many millions of dollars, well over $100 million, to develop" That a gross exaggeration there's only a handful of games that have reach this figure let alone sony exclusives.
Also, what about day 1 A, AA games? no excuse for them?

But I think there's little confusion here the quote refer to streaming service and you compare with Gamepass which ain't a streaming service.

For Sony there might be a lot of investment to do to upgrade their PS Now infra to support higher resolutions and new releases which would also see a higher number of user. These investment might even be too high to justify.
Microsoft on the other end may rely on azure platforms.

If we talk more specifically about PS Plus Collection than you can quote me on this, Sony will release most of there AAA day one on it by the end of the generation. When this happen I'll buy a ps5 digital edition and subscribe to it for sure

Sony is selling you a remastered Demon's Souls for $69.99 on PS5. Remastered is a quick cash grab, can be outsourced, and a cash cow. Playstation Plus Collection is just there to soften the blow for long time Sony fan to go with the $399 PS5 All digital edition. If you enhance your game and offer them in a subscription or offer digital backward compatibility you kill the remastered business.

you wrong, completely wrong... remaster and Remake are not the same thing. Demon's Souls Remake is a game remade from the ground with a completely different technology that demonstrates a true game of the next generation. A remaster is simply a small improvement in areas like resolution, textures, the basis of the game is the same.

Remake and remaster... two completely different things.

Because they aren't trying to sell PS Now, they are trying to sell a console.

This is all they should have said.

My bad I should have said Remastered/Remake games are a quick cash grab and Sony cash cow.

You are not making a new game from the grounds up and spending hours on level design, Story, Mechanics, Etc.

You are spending about 15-30% of the original budget to Remaster/Remake and slap on a $69.99 price tag on it. 

More power to Sony if people are willing to drop $69.99 on a remake, smart business. I can benefit after they are done playing with it and pick it up in the bargain bins or they drop the digital price a few months down the road.

⚠️ WARNED: Flaming

I don't think you know what remastered is.

And i don't think you understand just why and how a subscription model for gaming is not sustainable. And is not something MS would be doing at all if things were a little... different. And if yu really think about it, it would make sense o you too. But let help you along a bit say thereare20M people paying for GP every month. And these 20M pays an average of 10 months in a year (because people will not pay every single month). That's $2B from GP/year. Now deduct whatever it cost them to maintain the service, the cost to secure the non-first party games on the service, the cost to market it..etc. What's left? Lets say $1B (and this being generous). 

Now imagine that MS makes 4 AAA games a year that cost an average of $80M (some cot more, some cost less), that's $320M to make those 4 games. Now imagine that each game can sell 12M copies in a 12 Month window. And they are sold at an average price of $55 (some buy at $70, some at $60, some at $50 and some at $40). Thats $2.6B+ from just those 4 games. So they make from just 4 AAA games that can sell to around 12M people over 12 months more money than they would make from 20M people paying for GP for 1 year. They turn a $320M investment into a $2.4B return vs a $1B investment into a $1B return (if even that much).

And you really can't see why its a bad business model? And this is just one of many issues I touched on before.

Anyways... called it. This was exactly what I said and have been saying about this. Its not a sustainable business model.

with all due respect, and trying not to appear arrogant ... You should moderate your words a little.
Demon's Souls is one of the most influential games of the past decade and the origin of all soulsborne games. It is not up to you to make the judgment about "what is stupid or not", so I suggest you show a little respect for the Playstation Fans.

"Subscription models are not sustainable" he says while a whole industry including themselves moves to more and more subscription. What he's actually saying is "Subscription is a fair model, but it's not all of the money we could make, so we're gonna get both upfront and subscription because people are stupid and will always believe us when we plead poverty."

Remastered and remake are cheap low cost, low risk, and high reward business. Sony is selling Demon's Souls for $69.99, at the end of the day, that game will be pure profit.  

I have always said in the past that I worry about the game pass model. Just for the reason that you mention. We will be at the mercy of what Microsoft makes but I can always opt-out and stop supporting them. For now, it's just a great value and business model. 

You touch on the negative but fail to look at the positive of game pass model. I normally never buy a game around the release date because I don't like paying full price for a game that will be discount soon after release if I wait a few months. Also, I'm not going to drop money on a game that I may or may not like. But, with Gamepass you don't have to worry about this anymore. You don't have to wait for a price drop when a game release because you already own game pass and can play every new release at no extra cost. Also, any game you may of not want to drop money on you get to try and play for free and this has allowed me to play some great game that I would of otherwise never played. It is a sustainable business model just like Netflix, the more people that join the program the more money they can put in the content. How do you grow game pass, you will have to make content for everyone. You will start getting more niche games to attract all kinds of customers. In the current model, developers are always afraid to invest in new IPs since they might not recover their costs. Under the game pass model, new IPs will help grow the business model. 

We the gamer can also support games that we really like on gamepass. I never had to pay to play, Sea of Thieves since I got it from day 1 on gamepass. But, when they added microtransaction to the store, you have no problem dropping some cash to support a game that you love. As long as, they stay away from pay to win or lock content behind a paywall when the game release. I have no problem supporting games I like with paying for future DLC and Microtransaction that is outside the cost of gamepass.