New Playstation Plus Subscription Tiers [2022-03-29]

[Johnny Awesome]

Sony's changes aren't much of a threat to GamePass because they aren't releasing their big hits on Day 1. This seems more aimed at fooling existing PS users that they don't really need GamePass and to look the other way.

MS 1st party is in a lull right now before the onslaught begins so it's good timing on Sony's part.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

Sony's changes aren't much of a threat to GamePass because they aren't releasing their big hits on Day 1. This seems more aimed at fooling existing PS users that they don't really need GamePass and to look the other way.

Sony want their cake and to eat it too. Offering Sony exclusives in a subscription service, whilst also keeping a chunk of day 1 launch sales.
This is the only way to do it.

 

[JPT]

I tried PS Now, I think I played a handful of games on, most of the time it was not used.
So I think I will end up with just the essentials, if I gamed on Xbox, I think gamepass might be a decent fit, but again, I usually do not play many games in a short period. I play the occasional blockbuster ala Unchartered etc when they release.
Other than that, I tend to stick with just a game here or there and I am trying to cut down on buying games I end up not playing anyway.
Tl:dr; PS+ as its now, is what I am willing to pay for

 

[PSman1700]

https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/...xNsLdjrB7utLfBdxtooJkg-Gu2B0QCjeXOAbBKdGouk-8

Sony exec Jim Ryan believes live service games will dominate over subscriptions

 

[Deleted member 11852]

I tried PS Now, I think I played a handful of games on, most of the time it was not used.

I've not used it since the beta which launched in the UK early on PS4. I used it to play Arkham City and despite my terrible internet, it wasn't too bad but it was targeting 720p. I vaguely recall the game crashed a couple of times but I don't know if that was the game, Now or my internet ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[see colon]

Sony's changes aren't much of a threat to GamePass because they aren't releasing their big hits on Day 1. This seems more aimed at fooling existing PS users that they don't really need GamePass and to look the other way.

MS 1st party is in a lull right now before the onslaught begins so it's good timing on Sony's part.

Timestamped at 15:24
Listen to Mark Medina's comments, he's basically towing that line already. Repeats the "Xbox doesn't have games" myth while claiming Sony released so many more first party games last year while Xbox only had Forza and Halo. Beyond the fact that Forza was many outlets GOTY, but by my count Xbox Games Studios released 5 games in 2021 including 1 remake in the form of Age of Empires 2 HD only on PC, and another PC only game with AOE4. Playstation Studios only produced 7 games in 2021, and yeah that's more, and yeah they are all on console but... One of those games is Nioh Collection, a rerelease of a PS4 games on PS5, and not really "Sony" games just published outside of Japan by them. Another was Ghosts of Tsushima DC, again a re-release. Death Stranding DC, rerelease. Really what they had for new games was Ratchet, Returnal, Destruction All-Stars, and MLB The Show 21. I'm not going to pile on Destruction All-Stars, I'm sure that's someone's favorite game. But is it on the level of Xbox's 4 console games (Halo, Forza, Flight Sim and Psychonauts)? And MLB was day 1 Gamepass. Also, when a first party Xbox game gets remastered, it doesn't usually count as a rerelease, because it's just updated and next gen content is handled via Smart Delivery. Doom Eternal and Hellblade received next gen updates in 2021, off the top of my head. Medina's is implying that there aren't enough exclusive Xbox games yet, and that the quality isn't there, coming off one of the best years for Xbox first party games. I don't mean this as a callout to Mr Medina, I just noticed him as an example of exactly what you are talking about.

I think objectively the lack of first party day 1 access via the new PS+ makes it not a threat to Gamepass, and I agree that PS fans won't care as long as they get their own "best deal in gaming".

Also, watch Altano's face when Medina says he never wants to play Dark Cloud again. That's the right face to make tot that statement.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

I think objectively the lack of first party day 1 access via the new PS+ makes it not a threat to Gamepass, and I agree that PS fans won't care as long as they get their own "best deal in gaming".

I'm not sure I follow this logic? If Xbox GamePass subscribers get Halo Infinite 2 on launch and PlayStation PS+ subscribers get Uncharted 5 two months after launch, how do these things even impact each other? It's not like GamePass subscribers are getting games earlier than PS+ subscribers because these are console exclusives. What you want, I assume, it a regular cadence of new games to fuel the perception of value.

How important is day one inclusion? For some probably very important but when you look at the distribution of sales of popular games, they often only a fraction at launch, with the vast majority of sales coming later. Part of that is likely some people waiting for games to drop in price and part of it is probably people who don't game regularly buying games infrequently. People willing to wait for a price drop, are probably not fussed about playing it after launch and they're no worse off ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[BRiT]

It's not like GamePass subscribers are getting games earlier than PS+ subscribers

What you want, I assume, it a regular cadence of new games to fuel the perception of value.

I'm surprised Sony didn't use the opportunity to put MLB The Show 2022 on the PS Plus Premium Extra.

I saw the following breakdown of titles on PS Now the day of the announcement and shows how they're leaning towards older titles:

• 2022: 1 title (Shadow Warriors 3)
• 2021: 3
• 2020: 19
• 2019: 16
• 2018: 34
• 2017: 79
• 2016: 118
• 2015: 96
• 2014: 90
• 2013: 70
• 2012: 69
• 2011: 79
• 2010: 51
• 2009: 42
• 2008: 32
• 2007: 24
• 2006: 2
• 2005: 2
• 2003: 4
• 2002: 6
• 2001: 5

Total: 842

770 of the 842 titles are 2017 or older, 91.4%.

 

[PSman1700]

770 of the 842 titles are 2017 or older, 91.4%.

Lol.

 

[iroboto]

770 of the 842 titles are 2017 or older, 91.4%.

yikes.
I think if I consume a subscriber service, I'm only interested in largely the last 2 years. Meaning 2021 and 2022 in this case.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

I'm surprised Sony didn't use the opportunity to put MLB The Show 2022 on the PS Plus Premium Extra. I saw the following breakdown of titles on PS Now the day of the announcement and shows how they're leaning towards older titles:

I'm not following this. It probably me, it's been a looong day. Are you saying that Microsoft are including games in GamePass faster than Sony are including those same games in PS+ ?

 

[BRiT]

Are you saying that Microsoft are including games in GamePass faster than Sony are including those same games in PS+ ?

Well GamePass does have the upcoming MLB The Show 2022 included on Day One, which is a Sony developed title.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

Well GamePass does have the upcoming MLB The Show 2022 included on Day One, which is a Sony developed title.

On right, sorry.. I did say it had been a long day! I was thinking about first party day 1 releases. Yes, it does look weird that MLB is in GamePass and not PS+ but I guess Microsoft is bankrolling that inclusion. Like I said above, Sony want their cake and eat it. Delicious, delicious cake. Cake being a euphamisn for money.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

I'm surprised Sony didn't use the opportunity to put MLB The Show 2022 on the PS Plus Premium Extra.

I saw the following breakdown of titles on PS Now the day of the announcement and shows how they're leaning towards older titles:

• 2022: 1 title (Shadow Warriors 3)
• 2021: 3
• 2020: 19
• 2019: 16
• 2018: 34
• 2017: 79
• 2016: 118
• 2015: 96
• 2014: 90
• 2013: 70
• 2012: 69
• 2011: 79
• 2010: 51
• 2009: 42
• 2008: 32
• 2007: 24
• 2006: 2
• 2005: 2
• 2003: 4
• 2002: 6
• 2001: 5

Total: 842

770 of the 842 titles are 2017 or older, 91.4%.

Hmmm, that, IMO, is a larger potential drawback versus Game Pass than 1st party titles appearing day one on PlayStation Plus. If 90%+ of the titles on the subscription service are back catalog titles that are 5+ years old that might lead a lot of people to wonder why bother? I'm sure there will also be people that see an easy way to play really old games as a plus (IE - a way to play some classics without having to buy it), but I find that a lot of people into classic games generally enjoy owning the game more than playing it in some cases. Although they do like being able to just play a classic game they own for an hour or two before putting it back on the shelf.

I want to say that greater than 90%+ of games on Game Pass are newer than 5 years old. Most of the really old titles are due to the inclusion of EA Play and MS Studio back catalog games. 3rd party games outside of that don't usually go that far back although there are some Publisher exceptions (Square-Enix and Sega, for example). I want to say (because I don't want to count ) that greater than 80% of games on Game Pass are newer than 2-3 years old.

Of course, that said, maybe going forward there will be more effort put into having newer games on PlayStation Plus?

But as See-Colon mentioned, considering it's the only comparable subscription service on PlayStation, will it still see larger subscription numbers just because it's the only large subscription service on PlayStation?

That last sentence just made me realize that EA Play isn't included in PlayStation Plus like it is in Game Pass.

Regards,
SB

 

[see colon]

'm not sure I follow this logic? If Xbox GamePass subscribers get Halo Infinite 2 on launch and PlayStation PS+ subscribers get Uncharted 5 two months after launch, how do these things even impact each other? It's not like GamePass subscribers are getting games earlier than PS+ subscribers because these are console exclusives. What you want, I assume, it a regular cadence of new games to fuel the perception of value.

Day 1 first party games are more valuable from a user side perspective because you are getting a full value new release game for "free", vs one that is likely to have a price drop or GOTY style rerelease when it gets added later. Plus, with multiplayer games, you have a larger potential to have all of your friends playing the same games together if you all have access to the same games at the same time included in that subscription. If a game is released and comes to a subscription service 6 months later, some of the user base for that game will have moved on already.

So yeah, you want regular releases. But we've seen that Gamepass has regular releases. And I would assume PS+ tiers will also have regular releases. But if we are going to assume that, on average, all things will be equal (same amount of games, same quality of games), wouldn't the new releases be more desirable than older games simply on the merits of recency?

 

[Deleted member 11852]

Day 1 first party games are more valuable from a user side perspective because you are getting a full value new release game for "free", vs one that is likely to have a price drop or GOTY style rerelease when it gets added later.

That's an interesting perspective, I hadn't thought it of it like that. Time will tell how long it takes Sony's first party releases to appear in PS+ and I imagine this will mostly depend on what Sony's sales data curve over time looks like.

 

[Johnny Awesome]

IMO this is all about Sony trying to pretend that they have their own GamePass equivalent, but offering something much less.

 

[Nesh]

Really I have no idea how that works financially. You have like a growing list of "free" 1st party games day 1 on gamepass that maintains a fixed price to subscribe. An increasing amount of games that needed tenths to hundreds of millions to make are accessed through that single subscription and are sharing the gamepass revenue in some form.

It gives the impression that these games or gamepass are greately subsidized to exist in gamepass because I cant see how that can be sustainable and be as profitable for the studio that made the game.

Sony is giving something "lesser" most likely because they cant subsidize a fixed subscription that gets "free" games day 1 release. They want to make sure their games break even and maximise their profit potential, then put them in the Premium. Thats very understandable and I dont blame Sony. I m not so sure game profitability is guaranteed with a Gamepass model.

 

[see colon]

IMO this is all about Sony trying to pretend that they have their own GamePass equivalent, but offering something much less.

As much as that is the case, I also think they needed to do something with PSNow. Wasn't that $9.99 a month? That was a poor deal that got slightly better when they started letting you play game locally, but you still needed to pay for Plus to play online. So these new tiers of Plus just combine those into a cheaper option all around, assuming you pay for plus already.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

IMO this is all about Sony trying to pretend that they have their own GamePass equivalent, but offering something much less.

It's exactly this, but I don't follow "pretend". Perhaps it depends on what an individual considers the defining aspect of GamePass to be? If it's first party games available on launch day then Sony does not have a Game Pass equivalent. If it's having a big variety of games being available for a low monthly cost then yes they do.

PlayStation and Xbox are are in different places in terms of market share and profitability. Microsoft are trying to massively grow Xbox and coming from third place means they need a considerable effort to make headway - that's why they're spending. We know where PlayStaton is profitable because it's in the financial reports. They make money by selling games and content so they are not going to want to lose those sales. It's a business after all.