Support NeoGAF

[MonarchJT]

that full exclusive part is so old school that seem to read something out from the 90'
i hope modern gamers think better than this

 

[DaGwaphics]

I've never even hear of that Netflix trick. Yeah, on the 1$ deal everyone mentions it when it comes to profits but like you said folks are eventually just going to be lazy and just pay the regular gamepass price one day.

I'd bet that there are a lot more full price customers already than most think. On an enthusiast forum everyone knows how the $1 deal works, but in general you likely have a lot of people that just see the "upgrade for $1" in the Xbox dash. They probably don't even top-up their gold first.

I remember I only toped up one additional year when I did the upgrade, so everyone doing the full 3yrs isn't a given. I did grab 4 of the 3 month cards on discount this last black Friday, but yeah, I'm a cheap bastard.

 

[phil_t98]

Yup.

GP subs are growing so much it means people are sticking. Whether it's buying Gold and doing $1 top ups or paying reg price because they have no idea that $1 top works like that it doesn't matter.

GP subs are growing like crazy despite Xbox console sales being lousy last bunch of years.

And I don't want to hear any BS answers like it's the same people doing free trials who are making new Xbox profiles every month. There's only so many people in the world who go through that hassle. That's like saying there's nobody paying for Netflix because everyone is making new profiles with a new gmail account for their free introductory month.

The £1 top up when you look at it brings it the same price as PSnow for a year. Xbox live is £50 a year and add the £1 conversion as people keep saying on here then it’s same as PSnow. I think the thing with PSnow is they ain’t putting the games on there fast enough and most of it is like ps3 stuff.

I had a look at it and for me there ain’t enough PS4 on there

 

[NahaNago]

With streaming, what we lose out on is the ability to play content offline. This is why I don't think streaming will ever become the default way or the only option.

Streaming offers convenience and I understand that most of the time, convenience will always win out over other things but I don't think it will replace downloads 100%. There is a real possibility that it can and that is scary. I personally hope that it never comes to that.

Microsoft understood that (or how I took it), the reason why they introduced Game Pass with downloads and added streaming to it later compared to Sony who started with streaming and added downloads later.

But music and movie also started out as physical products like dvds, then we had downloads since streaming wasn't that great, and now we are removing places to buy either music or movies like the google store and playstation store and focusing on streaming/subscriptions. It is inevitable.

 

[Bryank75]

What a mess, OP.

Embarrassing, really.

Yikes.

 

[Bryank75]

It would be difficult for PlayStation to offer a direct competitor to Game Pass with first party titles day 1 release because as a company, Sony needs to sell software (games, music, movies) and hardware (TVs, PlayStation, electronics etc) consistently to keep the company afloat. They don't have various mammoth-size revenue streams like Microsoft does, and they can't afford to take big bets or big risks like Microsoft is doing with Game Pass. If they do offer some sort of direct competitor, and they likely will by revamping PS Now, it would probably be the same as it is now but with first party titles on a 6 to 9 month delay or something like that, akin to EA Play. But I expect Sony to stick to their traditional software selling approach.

For comparison purposes, Sony's market cap is 139.79 Billion. Microsoft is around 1.2 TRILLION. That's a gigantic difference. Microsoft is worth around 10 Sony size companies, or if it wanted to it could buy SONY 10 times over.

You'd be better off looking at cash flow than market value for this..... market value is unrealized until you sell it as a shareholder and cannot be used in the day to day operation of the company.

Of course MSFT have plenty of cash too but it is not at all as inflated at their market value.

 

[Bryank75]

Gamepass jealousy and angry that Playstation games are appearing on PC, I'm pretty sure I've covered everything.

Well, if you don't read a single thing I typed...including the title.....

I said Sony isn't good at services and should stick to making hardware and games. What they should be investing in is more studios and exclusives.... to make the platform more unavoidable.

There was very little focus on GP at all.... of course Xbox fans came in with whatever they wanted to say, trying to pin an insult on me one way or another.

 

[NinjaBoiX]

I love it when nerds on the internet try to offer up a business plan for billion dollar, multinational corporations, as if they know the first thing about it.

You’re not writing a letter to Santa bro.

 

[Bryank75]

This "full exclusive" bullshit ll no longer be a thing, companies like money, they dont care about you. Just look at Death Stranding made U$27mi in 6 mounths on PC ( all digitaly ). MS started this trend and Sony just joined the cash train and ll keep realeasing their games at least on PC, Nintendo ll join too sooner or later, the fact is that "full exclusive" is just no longer finacially "good"

Yeah, tell that to Nintendo.

Exclusives make the industry competitive, it is how PlayStation made their comeback during the PS3 generation.

I mean, why would you want less competition? The reason is because you know PlayStation would crush everyone if they focused 100% on expanding exclusives and keeping them off other platforms permanently.

The entire reason to make exclusives is to attract people to your platform in the first place...... so you'd need to be braindead to be making the argument for exclusives not to exist or for platform holders to give charity to all other platforms.... it harms the longterm health and potential playerbase.

 

[OrionNebula]

I find myself being more and more annoyed with playstation’s approach and also by the extreme lack of clear communication/message in the last few years. As a paying customer, it’s not something I will support on and on. I like their games and their ips, but that does not make it my primary console guaranteed by any stretch of the imagination.

 

[Bryank75]

that full exclusive part is so old school that seem to read something out from the 90'
i hope modern gamers think better than this

Exclusives are made with the purpose of attracting gamers to a platform and maximizing the userbase.

It is highly ironic that people like you cheered on the Zenimax acquisition, which didnt bring any new games to Xbox but only took them off PS...... but now argue against exclusives because the shoe is on the other foot. At least you wear your hypocrisy on your sleeve....

 

[Bryank75]

I love it when nerds on the internet try to offer up a business plan for billion dollar, multinational corporations, as if they know the first thing about it.

You’re not writing a letter to Santa bro.

My arguments are sound...attack them if you can...not me.

 

[yugoluke]

Here's the deal.

Games are $90 a pop ($100 or more after taxes) in Canada. I am well off financially, but for the price of less than 3 games I have 3 years of Gamepass that gives me access to more games than I know what to do with. Yes I did do the whole $1 upgrade, but even at full price I am saving money.

I never buy new games day and date of release.

This has caused me to play fewer games over the last few years, that is until Gamepass came out.

Now I play more than I ever had, and I have the freedom to expirament with genre's that I have never touched before. I don't feel guilty if I move on from a game, as there is no sunk cost fallacy that plagues my mind as it did when I committed money to a game I ended up disliking.

You can share Gamepass with family, which is really cool. I don't give a fuck about sports games but brother does. Solution? With EA Play partnership, he can play whatever he wants.

I have a PS5 in addition to a Series X, but play the Series X more as there due to the better value.

I play the PS5, but have almost exclusively played free games from the PS collection, and PS +. The only two games I have purchased on the PS5 is demon souls (which I hated, and cannot return. Love Sekiro btw) and that bow and bird game where you traverse the environment fast.

Take what you will from my statements, but at the end of the day I enjoy gaming now more than ever. I have access to more games, and get more than my money's worth every month.

If Playstation makes a service where I can enjoy their entire first party library, day and date, and 3rd parties, I will be on that in an instant.

Consumer habits have changed. If they fail to accommodate the shifting landscape of consumer consumption habits, that is on them.

Consumers respond to value. Regardless of brand, critical reception, or history. The option that provides more value will win out among the masses who do not frequent NeoGaf.

 

[sunnysideup]

Netflix, amazon prime, hbo are all about exclusives.

 

[EverydayBeast]

Game pass is a misleading service the idea of experiencing so many games in such a short time frame (1 month subscription) just won’t happen you hear that it’s $1 and think “thanks nutts!” The most economical way to game is on sales, and to be straightforward hype.

 

[NinjaBoiX]

My arguments are sound...attack them if you can...not me.

Sony know what they’re doing, and they know the direction they choose to be heading in.

I know you’re just offering up an opinion but it comes across as very “wtf are you doing Sony.”

I don’t think they need your help.

 

[EDMIX]

look at whats happend with Music, TV, and Movies

Yea, and you can still buy a CD, you can still watch TV without a subscription and you can still go to the movies and buy them physically.

With gaming being very expensive, I don't see it going 100% that in a very, very long time (if ever) , shit you couldn't even argue the industries already talked about are 100% that. So yea, look at them....they have the OPTION for subscription, but clearly its only an option because not all people wish to view their content the exact way 100%.

Gaming will be no different and I'd argue it would be even harder to get it to be the majority option.

Not all consumers want to rent, stream or pay monthly for the games the wish to play. Shit, Stadia failing the way it did shows MOST really don't actually want that. I think its easy to get shows on board, music on board, but people still like to go to the movies, people still like to BUY AND OWN THEIR FUCKING GAMES. Some might be ok streaming a movie, some might ok streaming a game, majority likely want to own it or go to the place to see it etc Even in the area where people stream music, they also still download it, buy the CD etc. The footprint of music hasn't changed, thus is easy to download..... Games on the other hand get LARGER each gen, not smaller, so you will continue to see people like myself that wish to own a physical copy, vs stream, rent, download etc.

The community already doesn't fucking trust publishers to keep severs open for life to just DOWNLOAD a game, let alone a whole ass set up in which you NEED them to connect to, to play your entire library in general. We literally have a thread up of PS Store for PS Vita, PSP and PS3 dying. Sure you can still download the game, but when does that happen with streaming?

We had PSP in 2004, PS3 in 2006 and Vita in 2012, the fact that their stores are literally closing very much questions how much of the industry really wants or trust anyone publisher or company with streaming when we can't even trust 1 with digital download shit, let alone a streaming set up where you need them to exist for life in order to play a game fully. I don't know if enough really trust anyone company to go all in on such a concept and I believe with games getting bigger, you will continue to see a lot of consumers still opting to actually own their games vs rent.

So I'd argue we need the same amount of time with streaming that we had with PS3, PSP, Wii etc to see how it will even play out before making it sound as if those stores or services will be around for life or something.

What is to stop Activision from pulling Call Of Duty XYZ to push units of their new game?

What is to stop EA from pulling each Madden or pulling each Battlefield?

if Sony advertized PSNow more, and put first party games day and date, and paid for 3rd psrty games day and date, PSNow would be a lot bigger already than it currently is.

Sure, they'd also have less actual game sales.... So PS Now is an option for Sony because they move record units in both hardware and software. I'm not sure why they'd seek to then get less money by devaluing their games by putting them on a service day and date when they can clearly move 15 or 20 million units of those games, same with Nintendo. They have a legitimate reason why they don't do that. They are the leaders in those areas, thus they have no ode to sell less units.

MS on the other hand...... yea they need to do this. When was the last time MS had a game move 10 million units? Having that happen several times in generation is normal for Sony and Nintendo, thus they have little reason to devalue and do a streaming or rental thing to offer those games for lessor prices day 1 or something, that is something MS must do.

 

[sunnysideup]

Here's the deal.

Games are $90 a pop ($100 or more after taxes) in Canada. I am well off financially, but for the price of less than 3 games I have 3 years of Gamepass that gives me access to more games than I know what to do with. Yes I did do the whole $1 upgrade, but even at full price I am saving money.

I never buy new games day and date of release.

This has caused me to play fewer games over the last few years, that is until Gamepass came out.

Now I play more than I ever had, and I have the freedom to expirament with genre's that I have never touched before. I don't feel guilty if I move on from a game, as there is no sunk cost fallacy that plagues my mind as it did when I committed money to a game I ended up disliking.

You can share Gamepass with family, which is really cool. I don't give a fuck about sports games but brother does. Solution? With EA Play partnership, he can play whatever he wants.

I have a PS5 in addition to a Series X, but play the Series X more as there due to the better value.

I play the PS5, but have almost exclusively played free games from the PS collection, and PS +. The only two games I have purchased on the PS5 is demon souls (which I hated, and cannot return. Love Sekiro btw) and that bow and bird game where you traverse the environment fast.

Take what you will from my statements, but at the end of the day I enjoy gaming now more than ever. I have access to more games, and get more than my money's worth every month.

If Playstation makes a service where I can enjoy their entire first party library, day and date, and 3rd parties, I will be on that in an instant.

Consumer habits have changed. If they fail to accommodate the shifting landscape of consumer consumption habits, that is on them.

Consumers respond to value. Regardless of brand, critical reception, or history. The option that provides more value will win out among the masses who do not frequent NeoGaf.

Thing is games are fucking dirt cheap, sure ps5 exclusive are abit much right now. But everything else can be found for 20 or less on on pc even less than that. And offer an insane amount of value, an average game takes 50hours to beat. That is almost impossible if you have a job and a family.

I just dont get the value. Why not spend 15 bucks on the game you want to play rather one of ms lame selection. If you actually play games, you will always be behind the curve.

Makes no sense. You have to be unemployed, no children to see the value.

 

[Nikana]

This seems to stem from the Playstation games on PC thing which from a financial standpoint makes far more sense than the walled garden people are used to. The idea of exclusives was to entice the player into your ecosystem which started and stopped at the console for Sony. They no longer have to invest nearly as heavily to open up that userbase and give more people the opportunity to play. Its more dollars in their pocket.

More dollars in their pocket means more opportunities for growth. Just as it was before when you just played Playstation games on Playstation.

Nobody cares about the walled gardens except the loyalists that for whatever reason buy a product and act the manufacture are their friend.

 

[Bittermich]

It seems obvious that Sony are working on a competitor to Gamepass or a re-imagining of PSNow....

However, based on being a PlayStation fan for the longest time they are just terrible at services and it is not within their core competencies.
PS5 has been out months now and UI updates are few and far between, changing next to nothing.

Customer service is atrociously bad and is historically notorious among gamers, trying to get a refund is like trying to get blood out of a stone and they have run afoul of authorities several times for denying consumer rights.

When you try and raise concerns on twitter or there is some type of negative backlash, Sony executives and employees bury their heads in the sand and ignore it rather than engage and try and improve.

I could go on and on, we have all experienced how bad services are on PlayStation.

What PlayStation do well is mass produce hardware targeting prices and sku's and making them very desirable on a global scale. They also have traditionally managed creative initiatives like making games and films etc.

If PlayStation come out, thinking a new service like Gamepass is going to take-off, I think they are hugely mistaken.

No PS fans want a new service, we want new studios... we want more exclusives and we want them to be full exclusive.

The direction is all wrong and PS management doesn't listen or have a clue.

true

 

[DaGwaphics]

Sure, they'd also have less actual game sales.... So PS Now is an option for Sony because they move record units in both hardware and software. I'm not sure why they'd seek to then get less money by devaluing their games by putting them on a service day and date when they can clearly move 15 or 20 million units of those games, same with Nintendo. They have a legitimate reason why they don't do that. They are the leaders in those areas, thus they have no ode to sell less units.

They certainly don't sell 15-20m off every game, not even the majority. And they don't sell every copy for $60/$70. Just look at every single piece of software they've sold on the PS4, they could have made more dollars than all that put together (every single sale) if every PS4 owner was paying them $10/mo. That's just how it is.

 

[Rhazer Fusion]

We won't see improvements on playstation unless people like Jimbo and Hermen will got fired, and we got passionate people again, like Shawn, Andrew and cie.

There are rumours talking about Kojima working on a game with Microsoft, and before that he was working with Stadia based some other talks as well, if all this is true it means that Sony isn't approaching Kojima anymore, which will be another proof that the people that are in the head of playstation aka Jimbo and Hermen are two fuck retard clowns.

This does make me really wonder what Sony is doing over there. Rumors of Hideo working with Microsoft and even Stadia out of all companies kind of indicates that Sony isn’t approaching or pursuing Hideo when he’s seemingly wanting to do some work. I know people don’t want to hear this, but honestly Hideo’s game would probably sell best and best received on PlayStation which makes things even more perplexing.

 

[martino]

your feelings are not good for any business....you're boomer of video game with vision of the market that has 2 decades

 

[sunnysideup]

This seems to stem from the Playstation games on PC thing which from a financial standpoint makes far more sense than the walled garden people are used to. The idea of exclusives was to entice the player into your ecosystem which started and stopped at the console for Sony. They no longer have to invest nearly as heavily to open up that userbase and give more people the opportunity to play. Its more dollars in their pocket.

More dollars in their pocket means more opportunities for growth. Just as it was before when you just played Playstation games on Playstation.

Nobody cares about the walled gardens except the loyalists that for whatever reason buy a product and act the manufacture are their friend.

Netflix, amazon, hbo are all walled garden which focuses on exclusive content to make you subscribe.

They pay third parties to make movies aviable on their services. Sony makes moneys of third parties on playstation.

all of these services try to produce as much own exclusive content as possible.

That sony should do the opposite is ludicrous.

 

[EDMIX]

They certainly don't sell 15-20m off every game, not even the majority. And they don't sell every copy for $60/$70. Just look at every single piece of software they've sold on the PS4, they could have made more dollars than all that put together (every single sale) if every PS4 owner was paying them $10/mo. That's just how it is.

Good to know, never claimed that but good to know.... (I think) lol

They move enough units to have streaming simply an option...thats the point.

With games leaving gamepass every month and Sony literally closing the stores to PSP, VIta and PS3, I'm sorry but I trust no company with having my whole library in some subscription, rental, streaming trap.

No thanks.

 

[Aenima]

You seem insecure as fuck OP. Sony and Playstation brand is doing just fine. Xbox was pretty much at the bottom of the well last gen and they HAD to do something to compete with Playstation and thats what they doing. Having strong competition not only is healthy to MS, is healthy to Sony and is especially healthy to us gamers that end up getting great deals.

Its really tiresome to come in the forum looking for news and all i find is threads about console warriors and armchair CEO thinking they know more than a CEO that works for Playstation for more than 25 years.

 

[Nikana]

Netflix, amazon, hbo are all walled garden which focuses on exclusive content to make you subscribe.

They pay third parties to make movies aviable on their services. Sony makes moneys of third parties on playstation.

all of these services try to produce as much own exclusive content as possible.

That sony should do the opposite is ludicrous.

The content is not locked behind a singular piece of hardware. Its available too many different vendors with many different devices. Being in more places makes you more money.

What ludicrous is leaving money on they table to maintain a walled garden to please loyalists.

 

[DenchDeckard]

I hope every game from Sony gets a glorious port to PC. at least then we know it will be preserved well and run at higher settings.

 

[Balducci30]

I still use PS6 and I'm NEVER updating to that new shit lol Look, I don't mind subscription for stuff like Netflix, Amazon Prime etc as I've had them to for a decade plus, but I'm not renting my games, I'm not paying per month for PS or illustrator etc. EVERYTHING doesn't need to be a subscription.

Be like "box subscription of Peanut Brittle" , some shit you don't NEED a subscription for.

Wait why is subscription okay for movies (netflix) and bad for videogames? I also use Adobe cloud it’s way cheaper and you get basically all Adobe products updated - I think the issue is it doesn’t actually affect the quality of the product being released whether it’s sub or not.

 

[DaGwaphics]

Good to know, never claimed that but good to know.... (I think) lol

They move enough units to have streaming simply an option...thats the point.

You were talking about rentals too, in a thread about subscription services, but okay. I was just pointing out that rental/subscription services aren't some bizarre side-effect of being unable to sell software, but an option that exists because it is potentially more profitable than individual sales. The better you can sell software, the better you'd be at the subscription game, being weak at sales only hurts you there.

 

[sunnysideup]

The content is not locked behind a singular piece of hardware. Its available too many different vendors with many different devices. Being in more places makes you more money.

What ludicrous is leaving money on they table to maintain a walled garden to please loyalists.

There is no point in hbo if you can get game of thrones etc on netflix.

If you are not forced to buy a playstation, sony will not make a dime on gta7, and you will not subscribe to ps+. Playstation hardware is the gamepass or netflix. Only better.

 

[sainraja]

As far as I know, Netflix requires you to put in a payment method for any account you sign up with. That will give them your personal details because your credit will require that. So how did the $1 trick with Netflix work?

Just googled it. The free month in USA/Canada ended last fall.

I don't know about other countries, but we had a free trial month for new sign ups. Cancel anytime. It must had been the same free month promotion for 10 years.

 

[martino]

Netflix, amazon, hbo are all walled garden which focuses on exclusive content to make you subscribe.

They pay third parties to make movies aviable on their services. Sony makes moneys of third parties on playstation.

all of these services try to produce as much own exclusive content as possible.

That sony should do the opposite is ludicrous.

However those services are platform-agnostics

 

[DaGwaphics]

The content is not locked behind a singular piece of hardware. Its available too many different vendors with many different devices. Being in more places makes you more money.

What ludicrous is leaving money on they table to maintain a walled garden to please loyalists.

Oh no. Nikana has fallen to the dark side, the "can't leave money on the table group".

I guess I'm a classic console loyalist, but I can totally see the reasoning behind Sony's protectiveness of their exclusives. Most of what they earn comes from third-parties, what is the best way to get the masses to buy my box so that all that lucrative third-party money comes to me instead of my competitors. If only there was some way that I could incentivize the purchase of my box....

 

[Nikana]

There is no point in hbo if you can get game of thrones etc on netflix.

I dont need HBO to watch GoT so I am not sure what your point is?

But you seem to be misunderstanding or I am not being clear enough. The content is indeed the driving factor to your platform. But your platform being accessible by more than one means is the key.

Netflix has exclusive content. Sometimes it comes to DVD/Blu Ray, sometimes it doesnt. But if people had to buy a $399 box just to get Netflix they wouldnt have nearly as many subscribers.

 

[EDMIX]

Wait why is subscription okay for movies (netflix) and bad for videogames? I also use Adobe cloud it’s way cheaper and you get basically all Adobe products updated - I think the issue is it doesn’t actually affect the quality of the product being released whether it’s sub or not.

Easy, shows are cheap 30 min to a hour time sinks where I don't mind streaming it, games are expensive and I'd rather own them as suppose to have to connect to play ALL MY GAMES. So no one is saying something isn't or is ok, (dear god get that out of your systems please), what is being stated is I PERSONALLY don't give a shit to stream or rent my games..

I don't use cloud for PS because I literally own a copy of PS6, why would I then pay money for life for something I already own and NEED to be online to use? Nahhhhhh

Logical reasons exist why many don't use stuff like that as subscriptions. If you are ok with that, have at it.

So I don't care if my internet cuts off and I can't watch a show, but I'm not fucking adding in my whole game library and my actual work to that equation. I don't mind subscriptions, but no way in hell am I putting all hobbies in subscriptions, let alone my damn work to be required to be always online when I literally have a copy of PS already, but shit I should pay not only more, but monthly and locked to online? nahhhh, I'm not getting in that trap.

 

[Nikana]

Oh no. Nikana has fallen to the dark side, the "can't leave money on the table group".

Cant leave bitcoin on the crypto table.

Better?

 

[Stuart360]

Yea, and you can still buy a CD, you can still watch TV without a subscription and you can still go to the movies and buy them physically.

With gaming being very expensive, I don't see it going 100% that in a very, very long time (if ever) , shit you couldn't even argue the industries already talked about are 100% that. So yea, look at them....they have the OPTION for subscription, but clearly its only an option because not all people wish to view their content the exact way 100%.

Gaming will be no different and I'd argue it would be even harder to get it to be the majority option.

Not all consumers want to rent, stream or pay monthly for the games the wish to play. Shit, Stadia failing the way it did shows MOST really don't actually want that. I think its easy to get shows on board, music on board, but people still like to go to the movies, people still like to BUY AND OWN THEIR FUCKING GAMES. Some might be ok streaming a movie, some might ok streaming a game, majority likely want to own it or go to the place to see it etc Even in the area where people stream music, they also still download it, buy the CD etc. The footprint of music hasn't changed, thus is easy to download..... Games on the other hand get LARGER each gen, not smaller, so you will continue to see people like myself that wish to own a physical copy, vs stream, rent, download etc.

The community already doesn't fucking trust publishers to keep severs open for life to just DOWNLOAD a game, let alone a whole ass set up in which you NEED them to connect to, to play your entire library in general. We literally have a thread up of PS Store for PS Vita, PSP and PS3 dying. Sure you can still download the game, but when does that happen with streaming?

We had PSP in 2004, PS3 in 2006 and Vita in 2012, the fact that their stores are literally closing very much questions how much of the industry really wants or trust anyone publisher or company with streaming when we can't even trust 1 with digital download shit, let alone a streaming set up where you need them to exist for life in order to play a game fully. I don't know if enough really trust anyone company to go all in on such a concept and I believe with games getting bigger, you will continue to see a lot of consumers still opting to actually own their games vs rent.

So I'd argue we need the same amount of time with streaming that we had with PS3, PSP, Wii etc to see how it will even play out before making it sound as if those stores or services will be around for life or something.

What is to stop Activision from pulling Call Of Duty XYZ to push units of their new game?

What is to stop EA from pulling each Madden or pulling each Battlefield?

Well there will def be gamers that still want to buy games, that still want to download games to hardware, even 20 years from now. We still see it with people buying music cd's.
The problem is in 20 years or so, will there be enough of them kind of gamers for Sony and Microsoft to consider the excpenditure of designing, developing, and releasing a console?.
Thats the question. If in their mind, 80% of gamers are already on streaming plans, those 20% that are left may mean its not financially viable to consider releasing another console.

 

[Balducci30]

Thing is games are fucking dirt cheap, sure ps5 exclusive are abit much right now. But everything else can be found for 20 or less on on pc even less than that. And offer an insane amount of value, an average game takes 50hours to beat. That is almost impossible if you have a job and a family.

I just dont get the value. Why not spend 15 bucks on the game you want to play rather one of ms lame selection. If you actually play games, you will always be behind the curve.

Makes no sense. You have to be unemployed, no children to see the value.

I’m not the op but I’m not unemployed, or single - definitely don’t have children though. I play games for mindless fun in short spurts and get bored fairly easily - I don’t want to play a single game for 50 hours that’s way too long. I’d rather be able to switch to whatever I’m in the mood for. I have the money but paying 40 bucks or more for a videogame for me always makes me feel a little guilty for the amount of enjoyment videogames bring into my life - the money can be better used elsewhere. I just hope the people in charge aren’t against this because I don’t see the negative to having a gamepass competitor on my PS5.

 

[Rhazer Fusion]

No one should want full exclusives

I see what you are saying, but that’s how platforms form an identity. Doesn’t it give consumers a reason to invest into a company’s ecosystem. Exclusives also generally bring out the nest in hardware and the developers. If we didn’t have full exclusives, why have multiple platforms then if they aren’t offering anything unique or special? There is a reason Nintendo is dominating worldwide now. It offers an experience and games you can’t get elsewhere.

 

[Balducci30]

Easy, shows are cheap 30 min to a hour time sinks where I don't mind streaming it, games are expensive and I'd rather own them as suppose to have to connect to play ALL MY GAMES. So no one is saying something isn't or is ok, (dear god get that out of your systems please), what is being stated is I PERSONALLY don't give a shit to stream or rent my games..

I don't use cloud for PS because I literally own a copy of PS6, why would I then pay money for life for something I already own and NEED to be online to use? Nahhhhhh

Logical reasons exist why many don't use stuff like that as subscriptions. If you are ok with that, have at it.

So I don't care if my internet cuts off and I can't watch a show, but I'm not fucking adding in my whole game library and my actual work to that equation. I don't mind subscriptions, but no way in hell am I putting all hobbies in subscriptions, let alone my damn work to be required to be always online when I literally have a copy of PS already, but shit I should pay not only more, but monthly and locked to online? nahhhh, I'm not getting in that trap.

I get that’s a personal choice and you do you with that - I get this matters to some people. It’s just doesn’t matter to me and I don’t think it matters to a lot of people as far as the attitudes of most of the people I know on any platform - so I think there is basically zero reason why Sony shouldn’t do this to at least give us the option.

 

[cormack12]

If Sony had their strong titles in place this wouldn't really be a conversation. I really think they should have held back one of TLOU II or GoT for next gen only. Probably GoT as we all expect a resale of TLOU II and I:SS was the flag bearer earlier in the PS4 launch. Failing that, at least delay it and do a dual launch with the PS5 patch.

People were happy to give Sony time after the launch but everything is being delayed, you can't expect another sackboy title to be met with the same enthusiasm as LBP2. You can't expect titles like D:AS, Deathloop and Godfall to get people hyped. Couple that with the hike in prices and the reactive scrambling way they've been responding to Xbox and things are just a bit flat.

Having said that, if GT7 and H:FW were out now then this conversation would be much quieter. But they are a victim of their own success. Given the popularity of PlayStation last gen, most players who have upgraded don't have any first party stuff to play as a back catalogue. Third parties are having delays as well so.......at the moment not great but they just need their big titles out.

 

[DaGwaphics]

But you seem to be misunderstanding or I am not being clear enough. The content is indeed the driving factor to your platform. But your platform being accessible by more than one means is the key.

Netflix has exclusive content. Sometimes it comes to DVD/Blu Ray, sometimes it doesnt. But if people had to buy a $399 box just to get Netflix they wouldnt have nearly as many subscribers.

Reasonable. Lowering all barriers is always the best way to go. Traditionally consoles have been the cheapest point of entry, but I can see streaming changing that.

Cant leave bitcoin on the crypto table.

Better?

It's a running joke I have going with some of the other Xbots. MS basically can't do anything Sony can because they "can't afford to leave that PS money on the table" is the line from the Sony faithful.

 

[EDMIX]

Well there will def be gamers that still want to buy games, that still want to download games to hardware, even 20 years from now. We still see it with people buying music cd's.
The problem is in 20 years or so, will there be enough of them kind of gamers for Sony and Microsoft to consider the excpenditure of designing, developing, and releasing a console?.
Thats the question. If in their mind, 80% of gamers are already on streaming plans, those 20% that are left may mean its not financially viable to consider releasing another console.

They fucking better release another console lol

I'm hoping that enough of us are still alive that make up a chunk of older gamers that they still put out hardware. Even if its at a higher price or something. As I get older, I just don't really trust having all my stuff in subscriptions or online only and sorta separate it with certain things. So TV might be the only thing i'm ok with cause having a show get pulled isn't a big deal to me (cause Ima steal it from torrents anyway lol) , but gaming I like to keep most of my set up physical as look at what we are dealing with with the PS Stores for Vita, PSP, PS3 etc.

If they are able to make some set up where you can download the game, put it on a disk, but the disk ONLY works on your PS8 or something, then I'd be ok with that if they have this intention of doing a rental or streaming thing, if they still have an option for consumers who wish to game offline/physical.

Like PS8 or NextBox6 you have an option to stream on the past gens, PC and some new mini box, but a more expensive option you buy a system with a disk drive, you buy the disk YOURSELVE like a certain RedRay (I don't know what they asses will be making in 20 years lol) and the drive can download the game, burn it to a disk and that disk can only be read on your system as DRM or something. It sounds crazy, but shit if we are the only 20%.....many of us might be willing to do such a set up if it means we can still game the way we wish to game.

 

[Bryank75]

Sony know what they’re doing, and they know the direction they choose to be heading in.

I know you’re just offering up an opinion but it comes across as very “wtf are you doing Sony.”

I don’t think they need your help.

Recent news like shutting down the stores, Xbox being able to get MLB on GP and Kojima possibly making a game for the competition makes me question their competence.

 

[Nikana]

Reasonable. Lowering all barriers is always the best way to go. Traditionally consoles have been the cheapest point of entry, but I can see streaming changing that.

Even apple knows that you can't keep a walled garden to make money on consumable content. Their customers who want to be apart of their experience have that option but they don't leave people out simply because they don't own an apple device. It doesn't make sense with consumable media.

 

[xShaun]

I feel you are looking at PlayStation the wrong way.

It's clear what the market plan has and will remain for Sony - Sell hardware and then sell AAA premium games at a premium rate. Same as Nintendo tbh.

Do not compare Sony to Microsoft as they both look at the console market differently.

Sony seem to be thinking of the here and now, and evolving Hardware every generation, whilst Xbox are looking more into the future and not caring about hardware as much but focusing on Software.

PlayStation competition with Xbox ended last year and now they just aren't I'm the same competition any more. This isn't slander or fanboyism it's a legitimate comparison.

 

[sunnysideup]

I dont need HBO to watch GoT so I am not sure what your point is?

But you seem to be misunderstanding or I am not being clear enough. The content is indeed the driving factor to your platform. But your platform being accessible by more than one means is the key.

Netflix has exclusive content. Sometimes it comes to DVD/Blu Ray, sometimes it doesnt. But if people had to buy a $399 box just to get Netflix they wouldnt have nearly as many subscribers.

Sony business is selling third party games. That is how they make money, instead subscription fees, they take a cut of other companies work.

To make playstation an attractive place to sell third party games, they make exclusive content.

The incentive to buy the next gta7 on playstation if you dont own playstion is slim.

 

[DrAspirino]

Exclusives are made with the purpose of attracting gamers to a platform and maximizing the userbase.

It is highly ironic that people like you cheered on the Zenimax acquisition, which didnt bring any new games to Xbox but only took them off PS.

Do you really think that would happen?

If anything, I'd say they'll keep this roll on "for free on Xbox, US$70 on PS5" to use it as PR to make Playstation look bad.

 

[Buhaj]

Last year, back when I had PS4 Pro, I got a used Xbox One X to see how it plays (had Xbox One in the past). Well... Xbox pad didn't seem so perfect anymore, and Gamepass seemed impressive at first, but I played two games for a bit and had nothing left that I wanted to play. Came back to PS a week later. The point is people may overestimate how Gamepass influences Sony decisions.