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

[BRiT]

I am curious as to what analytics or insights they were provided with.

The delay was 3 months. The PS5 reached 10 million units in July at roughly 250 days. So around 6.4 million consoles at April instead of 2.8 million in January. [Using a purely linear estimation, which is bound to be inaccurate but possibly close enough to discuss] They were downloaded by close to 4 million users. So they reached around 62% of the entire PS5 market. At that same attach rate, they would have had close to 1.75 Million downloads if released in January instead. Thats still off by an order of magnitude from whatever their projections sounded like. Sounds like very bad insights and analytics.

 

[Zaphod]

Sounds like very bad insights and analytics.

I think it's reasonable to assume download rates of freebies shot sky high during the pandemic, and the article doesn't state at which time they made those download projections.

Much more baffling is that he seems to think that download rates of freebies in any way, shape or form, translate to lost sales. If anything, he should be delighted that 4 million people got to play his middelingly-reviewed game and he got to take home a small profit. It is certainly not "devastating".

The alternative reality might just as well be them selling almost next to nill as they selling to any sizeable fraction of those 4 million. The former probably more likely than the latter.

Edit: Unless original deal Sony offered was a fixed-fee, but still based on some flawed/outdated estimate of projected downloads. Then can I see how he might feel a bit miffed, if actual downloads exceeded the protection to the tune of 10-15 times.

 

[BRiT]

Yeah, it's quite an odd situation, which is why it would be nice to know what the insights and analytics they were provided with. As SB said, hopefully all future deals are better structured.

 

[Zaphod]

I believe MS have said, about Game Pass, that they have a range of different contract terms (per download, fixed fee, time on service, other). I'd assume Sony also have different ways of determining payments for different partners.

I'd also assume that they don't actively try to screw over their partners with deliberately misleading projections, so what I'd be curios to know is how much wiggle-room the publishers/developers have in making these deals.

If they could have opted for a per-download fee, they should only be kicking themselves for not taking that gamble. If not, then I guess Sony lucked out, in terms of value for PS+, for their fixed spend.

 

[BRiT]

Details on the rollout @ https://blog.playstation.com/2022/0...0-games-and-more-value-than-ever/#sf255786980

Update: We’re making fantastic progress with our launch efforts and I wanted to update you on the
latest. We’re rolling out our new offering for PlayStation Plus a little earlier in select markets in Asia,
followed by Japan. Here is a look at our updated regional rollout schedule.

• Asia markets (excluding Japan) – targeting May 23, 2022
• Japan – targeting June 1, 2022
• Americas – targeting June 13, 2022
• Europe – targeting June 22, 2022

Additionally, we’re also expanding our cloud streaming access to the following locations for a total
of 30 markets with cloud streaming access**. The following markets will also offer the Premium tier
from PlayStation Plus at launch: Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Greece, Hungary, Malta, Poland,
Republic of Cyprus, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia.

**Current markets where PlayStation Now is available: US, Canada, Japan, UK, France, Germany, Belgium, Netherlands, Luxembourg, Austria, Switzerland, Ireland, Spain, Italy, Portugal, Norway, Denmark, Finland, and Sweden.

 

[BRiT]

According to Game Developer sources, Sony is requiring devs to offer timed game trials for PS+ Premium subscribers for games that cost more than $34

• must be 2 hours long
• devs have up to 3 months time to offer a timed trial
• change not retroactive

https://www.gamedeveloper.com/conso...a-requirement-for-some-playstation-developers

https://twitter.com/x/status/1518958606741295105

 

[Deleted member 11852]

As a user, this is BLOODY FANTASTIC!. I have read many accounts of developers speaking out on hating having to produce specific build demos, but if it's just the full game with a time-lock, then they may not be as complicated. It would mean many demos could be as big as the full game though. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[BRiT]

As a user, this is BLOODY FANTASTIC!.

Yes but no.

Try looking at it from this different view -- it's not as good as it should be. That "demo" feature is locked behind a premium subscription service tier. Sony should simply revise their refund policy to be automated and allow for 2 hours of game play for all titles and not lock it behind a subscription paywall.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

Try looking at it from this different view -- it's not as good as it should be. That "demo" feature is locked behind a premium subscription service tier. Sony should simply revise their refund policy to be automated and allow for 2 hours of game play for all titles and not lock it behind a subscription paywall.

A try-before-you-buy no-quibble refund policy would be great but no platform has that. People think Steam does, but the 2 hour playtime period only dictates whether you can request a refund, after which it gets reviewed. I've had requested denied, the only guarantee of a refund is if there is a real issue with the game. It's the same with Xbox where you can request a review for a refund if you "haven’t accumulated a significant amount of play" within 14 days. Sony are shifty bastards, their published refund policy is the bare minimum but I have asked for a refund of a game I played for an hour and after some engagement with the agent, he refunded me - because they are required to do so by UK consumer law.

As for it being behind a a subscription, sure it's a business model. They want you to pay them money. Why don't Microsoft just make GamePass free, they can certainly afford it. It'll be interesting to see how publishers react, because if they required to make demos I would imagine many will just release them to everybody on the PSN Store. I mean, why wouldn't you if you believe your game is worthy?

 

[BRiT]

A try-before-you-buy no-quibble refund policy would be great but no platform has that.

I completely agree. It has to be a lot easier than all existing means. The having to outlay funds to try a game and then go through a process to refund is not the desired state. Sadly, I don't see this changing at all unless the UK requires it by law. The US consumer protections are woefully inadequate by comparison. I don't see the US ever pushing for something consumer friendly.

As for it being behind a a subscription, sure it's a business model.

Do the developers get any benefit or a cut of the revenue from PlayStation Plus Premium tier subscribers? I didn't see that mentioned anywhere. I have not delved into extensive social media or other forums to find additional details.

In the morbid curiosity entertainment perspective, I would like to see some developers publish their next game that falls under these new requirements but entirely refuse to put out a forced demo. For no reason other than to see what Sony will do after 3 months time is up.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

Do the developers get any benefit or a cut of the revenue from PlayStation Plus Premium tier subscribers? I didn't see that mentioned anywhere. I have not delved into extensive social media or other forums to find additional details.

If they don't I can see some smaller developers (Indie and AA) decide to publish their titles on Xbox and PC first. After that wait for some return on investment before investing the time and money to ensure that they can meet Sony's requirement for a minimum 2 hour long demo.

Potentially, it could incentive some smaller developers to not even start on a PlayStation version of the game until they've finished the Xbox and PC versions of the game.

In some cases, they may be able to just time lock the full game for the demo (then there's the question of whether Sony will charge them extra fees for such a large download for a "demo"), but some titles don't really hook the player until you're more than 2 hours into the game. In those cases, a developer will feel the need to create a specific vertical slice of gameplay for the demo that they hope will entice the player into buying the game versus potentially discouraging a player from buying the game.

Regards,
SB

 

[Deleted member 11852]

I completely agree. It has to be a lot easier than all existing means. The having to outlay funds to try a game and then go through a process to refund is not the desired state. Sadly, I don't see this changing at all unless the UK requires it by law. The US consumer protections are woefully inadequate by comparison. I don't see the US ever pushing for something consumer friendly.

It's probably a more complex issue than it first seems, particularly in territories like EMEA where a lot of different consumer regulation applies. There are also different regulations governing financial transactions, along with different bank charge arrangements (incl. refunds). As Simpsons Bill Gates said "I didn't get rich by writing a lot of cheques!".

Do the developers get any benefit or a cut of the revenue from PlayStation Plus Premium tier subscribers? I didn't see that mentioned anywhere. I have not delved into extensive social media or other forums to find additional details.

No idea. Back in the PS3 days Sony did charge publisher for PSN bandwidth usage. It would be weird if that was still a thing today, but something you have to remember about Sony is how much money they lost really quickly by subsidising unprofitable ventures with profitable ones. That was also during the PS3 era and resulted in a five-year transformation that saw Sony axing a number of ventures (like Vaio) and making surviving business units responsible for justifying their existing in terms of profit.

If there are still bandwidth charges, then restricting demos to a subset of the user base - who are subsidising those costs with the more expensive subscription - could make sense from Sony's perspective. Then the value proposition to developers is not 'free' (as in beer) demos, but targeted at those who are presumably the core-spending segment of the user base with less risk of people just downloading anything to play it for a few hours with no intention to buy. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

If they don't I can see some smaller developers (Indie and AA) decide to publish their titles on Xbox and PC first. After that wait for some return on investment before investing the time and money to ensure that they can meet Sony's requirement for a minimum 2 hour long demo.

The reason you don't want to do that is you split your marketing effort to accommodate multiple pushes. That's never cheaper. And sales on the later platform can crater. Square Enix were really transparent about this with their Xbox Tomb Raider release window exclusivity and vowed never to repeat it.

 

[PSman1700]

Top-liked comment says enough, lets hope its just hearsay and not what Sony is actually planning on doing.

https://www.eurogamer.net/sony-repo...TdiN1bHHLckxspB8KIGWv4Z8R-1p7CzPj_bk#comments

 

[see colon]

A try-before-you-buy no-quibble refund policy would be great but no platform has that. People think Steam does, but the 2 hour playtime period only dictates whether you can request a refund, after which it gets reviewed. I've had requested denied, the only guarantee of a refund is if there is a real issue with the game. It's the same with Xbox where you can request a review for a refund if you "haven’t accumulated a significant amount of play" within 14 days. Sony are shifty bastards, their published refund policy is the bare minimum but I have asked for a refund of a game I played for an hour and after some engagement with the agent, he refunded me - because they are required to do so by UK consumer law.

GOG does 30 days and doesn't care how if you've played the game. It's fairly pro consumer to the point that some developers were upset about it.

 

[dobwal]

I guess 'copying' is okay but has connotations, such as kids copying each other's work at school. We could use duplicate, match, emulate, approximate, compete with, nuanced to the arguments and points. Technically duplicate may mean the same thing as 'copy' but it doesn't have the negative connotations that fuel console-warring.

How about “adopt”? I’m not sure how it’s seen as a bad thing. Adopting proven and well designed features that consumers like means you get to spend more time and resources are novel features that may differentiate your product.

If you spend your time reinventing the wheel because you don’t want to be perceived as “copying”, you probably end up with a less than stellar product.

 

[zed]

As a user, this is BLOODY FANTASTIC!. I have read many accounts of developers speaking out on hating having to produce specific build demos, but if it's just the full game with a time-lock, then they may not be as complicated. It would mean many demos could be as big as the full game though. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Yes it does seem to be pro consumer. Though I can see it altering how games are designed somewhat

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Top-liked comment says enough, lets hope its just hearsay and not what Sony is actually planning on doing.

https://www.eurogamer.net/sony-repo...TdiN1bHHLckxspB8KIGWv4Z8R-1p7CzPj_bk#comments

Data Science intervention - EG removed downvotes so you can't see how balanced an opinion is. Could be a highly controversial or even disagreed-with opinion, with 10x as many people disagreeing with this post than agreeing but it still floating as 'top voted'. See Brainflowers' reply, that's 34 votes to the 36 of this post you linked to. Vote counting is now complicated and not immediately indicative of anything. "Popularity" is even less a meaningful metric now than before the social-media changes.

 

[PSman1700]

Data Science intervention - EG removed downvotes so you can't see how balanced an opinion is. Could be a highly controversial or even disagreed-with opinion, with 10x as many people disagreeing with this post than agreeing but it still floating as 'top voted'. See Brainflowers' reply, that's 34 votes to the 36 of this post you linked to. Vote counting is now complicated and not immediately indicative of anything. "Popularity" is even less a meaningful metric now than before the social-media changes.

The FB comments section portrays a different story though (on the quoted article).

Wasnt aware they removed downvotes at EG, must be something new-ish. The top-voted has some merit still, even though not as accurate as before. The good old skimming over the comments section and reading the contents is going to be the only way then. Like here, the comment section largely is filled with people who disagree or dislike 'another remaster/remake'

https://www.eurogamer.net/naughty-d...Id_JHqcqhvaxtUtNMc1EpBh6kKyLqNaSEMnIuKxuLOj7Q

 

[Jay]

Not sure about the source, but I heard that the 2 hours may include download time.
Think it was like that for one of sony's 1P titles recently?

 

[Deleted member 11852]

GOG does 30 days and doesn't care how if you've played the game. It's fairly pro consumer to the point that some developers were upset about it.

This is definitely the more flexible policy I've seen but there is a review. From GOG's refund policy page:

Please keep in mind that we're actively monitoring the effects of our new Refund Policy to make sure no one is using it to hurt the developers that put their time and heart into making great games. We may refuse refunds in such individual cases.
​

But it sounds like there is only be a problem if you were repeatedly taking the piss.

Not sure about the source, but I heard that the 2 hours may include download time. Think it was like that for one of sony's 1P titles recently?

There definitely was a recent example where a demo timer started when you begun downloading but I can't recall the title. It doesn't seem like a big change to change the timer to start when you first load the game.

It's mind-bogglingly that multiple people at Sony thought that was remotely sensible.