Game Pass fans and gamers who simply want the best deal possible in terms of money, obviously want to compare the new Plus because being ok with it as is, doesn't help them. Game Pass is supposed to be the future of gaming, and its been out for a while now, so if Sony kinda ignores it, like they kinda are, then it doesn't bode well for that type of bang for your buck Netflix model. Nobody really wants to pay more for games, and who wouldn't want Sony first party day 1, but top quality for bargain prices just doesn't happen. That's not how things work unfortunately.
I think this is layout, so far, is a relatively decent proposal by PS. Some aren't happy about paying for BC in the Premium tier, but I'd bet this ends up an ongoing thing. Meaning instead of stopping BC like XB did, PS can justify continuing to bring BC titles until they all are added eventually.
While I need some more info, I'd guess I'll be moving up from Plus Essential ($60) to Plus Extra ($99). 400 more games, including some big AAA, for just $40 more per year seems like a steal to me. The BC games don't appeal that much to me personally.
The info I'm most curious about for the Extra tier, is:
Will there be more additional games added, and how long before they are, or how often?
If so, then will some of those added games be AAA first or third party, and how long after launch before they're added?
Will existing games be cycled out, and if so, how many and how often?
If Sony were to add games like Horizon Forbidden West or God of War Ragnarok, just 1 year after launch, that's something I could live with. If it's more than 1 year, then I just might stick with Essential and buy first party much closer to launch. I have to see what those 400 games are and whether they rotate in and out. If so then maybe Extra would still be worth it for me.
I disagree with your first paragraph. What Sony does has nothing to do with the success or movement of GamePass. GP is not validated if Sony response to it or not. Its been very evident that MS does not care what Sony does because they are moving in totally different directions. MS and Sony have totally different views about their service. MS is looking to build GP as a stand alone service that can be run on any device. Sony want to continue to tie in their service to their console. Its the reason why MS can make the decisions to put their games day one on the service because MS view GP as a Netflix service for games while Sony views their service as an extension of the PS system.
Also MS did not stop BC, licensing deals stopped BC which will be the same issue Sony will have for any games not developed by them.
It wasn't that long ago that either Spencer or Bond said Sony was coming out with their own version of Game Pass soon. That was no doubt said because of hopeful validation and because of it's potential competition.
Now as Sony, and some of the media and fans have been saying all along, less of them anyway, that this new Plus service wouldn't be a direct competitor to Game Pass. Which I would definitely agree now that it is not.
This absolutely removes some validation of Game Pass, because if this new Plus service was obviously direct competition, there would be a whole lot of, I told ya so's, and boasting of whichever service was obviously the better offer and deal.
Instead, Game Pass is clearly it's own thing still, trying to make a go of it, as well as this Plus service. The Plus service however, combines Now, which should help overall, and already has more history and a larger and steady subscriber base.
Both have pluses and minuses. Both are worth subscribing to, depending on your gaming wants and needs, or just get both if you can afford them. That's not an option for many though, so they'll have to choose, which is great, because it's all about choice. Phil has been clear XB is all for choice.
As for why MS put's their first party on Game Pass day 1, you're partially right, but it's more so because they can easily afford to. When you've got the worlds largest bank vault that consistently replentishes itself, you can easily do things like that, where others just can't because it won't work based only on the model.
When it comes to the licensing, is that because MS can't get them period, or because they don't want to spend the money there for whatever reason? If XB is doing all the work that needs to be done to get the BC games to the existing systems, but making no profit whatsoever, then why pay big money for licensing? Sony will be able to do this with the income from this new service structure, aside from the rare deals that are just refused to be made.