Playstation Now

[Figs]

I went through this thread and didn't see the answer I was looking for. When it comes to playing older games on the PS4 via PS Now, are they only rentable or can you pay a higher price to have them on your system like other streaming games? I hope they will have FF7 someday. I never played it before and I have been craving an RPG for quite some time.

 

[Havok83]

I went through this thread and didn't see the answer I was looking for. When it comes to playing older games on the PS4 via PS Now, are they only rentable or can you pay a higher price to have them on your system like other streaming games? I hope they will have FF7 someday. I never played it before and I have been craving an RPG for quite some time.

that's bc there is no answer. Its only rentable titles in the beta. Exactly what Now will look like when it officially launches is anyone's guess. The most we've gotten from Sony was that they are exploring different options

 

[XtremelyBaneful]

i'd rather them do a monthly flat rate like netflix than charge to play something you want.

 

[Destructus86]

i'd rather them do a monthly flat rate like netflix than charge to play something you want.

I agree...a fee per game just doesn't work. Especially for old games...I can get plenty of PS3 games for $10 and then I OWN it...rather then spending whatever they are charging to rent for a limited time

 

[XtremelyBaneful]

I agree...a fee per game just doesn't work. Especially for old games...I can get plenty of PS3 games for $10 and then I OWN it...rather then spending whatever they are charging to rent for a limited time

THIS! Hopefully this is all a bad joke and Sony switches things up to make PSNow the netflix of gaming.

 

[Havok83]

Open beta starts tomorrow

http://www.ign.com/articles/2014/07/30/sony-may-offer-a-subscription-option-for-playstation-now

 

[Poetic Chaos]

This will live or die by the cost of its subscription fee. People have already shown how much they're willing to pay for sub. services and it's $8 a month or less. It sounds ridiculous but I think charging anymore than $10 would doom this thing.

 

[Tron Bonne]

If I were to guess, I would say there'll probably be three subscription fees: one for unlimited access for PS1 game, next for unlimited PS1/PS2 games, and then a third for all titles from PS1 to PS3.

I mainly doubt there will be a flat fee for the entire thing, because I would assume with the amount of data we're talking about is probably pretty substantial and expensive to maintain.

 

[Destructus86]

For playing a full game....this is a horrible idea. But Sony does have something here. If they brought in their PS4 collection of games this would be a fantastic way to try a game for a couple others before buying.

 

[Poetic Chaos]

So how would you guys fix Playstation Now? I absolutely see games as a service as the future of gaming, but certainly not how PS Now is going about it.

I think the rental service should be applied only to PS4 games. $8/1 day, $30/1 week, $40/1 month. The 1 day option for party/multiplayer games you want for just one night with friends. Most single player campaigns can be beat within a week so offering it at half price I think is fair. The one month option for RPG length games. I think the pricing in this structure would still encourage buying a game outright to not cannibalize sales of new games while still offering a fair option to those who don't mind renting for a cheaper price.

Legacy games, as PS Now is currently, should just fall under a $10/month subscription service. They're old titles that aren't being bought anymore so the main cost they have to cover is server maintenance. A rental service just doesn't work here and won't be widely adopted as it is in the open beta.

 

[Havok83]

I think the rental service should be applied only to PS4 games. $8/1 day, $30/1 week, $40/1 month.

You're crazy with pricing like that. This thing isnt likely to offer PS4 games this gen or not until very late so that should be scratched off right off the bat.

They should rebrand Now as a service to stream games as opposed to a service to rent games. Obviously theres overlap, but their focus and current stance needs to be adjusted. If one owns a game digitally that is on Now, then a person should be able to stream it as long as they pay into the service. Having to "rent" a title, you already own is absurd. A $10/month or $90/100 a year for streaming privileges seems very reasonable.

For games you dont own, then thats where rentals will come into play. There shouldnt be any option past 30 days. If you need to go longer, then you might as well just buy the game, in which case you can always subscribe to Now to get streaming privileges any time in the future.

There does need to be a tier to pricing bc not everything on PSN is priced the same. They should find a way to make it dynamic so that it adjusts itself to price drops. Sony needs to regulate this more bc giving the publishers free reign to decide how they'll price things isnt the best option although I suspect they even agreed to this as a compromise to get more to support this

So how would you guys fix Playstation Now? I absolutely see games as a service as the future of gaming, but certainly not how PS Now is going about it.

I think the rental service should be applied only to PS4 games. $8/1 day, $30/1 week, $40/1 month. The 1 day option for party/multiplayer games you want for just one night with friends. Most single player campaigns can be beat within a week so offering it at half price I think is fair. The one month option for RPG length games. I think the pricing in this structure would still encourage buying a game outright to not cannibalize sales of new games while still offering a fair option to those who don't mind renting for a cheaper price.

Legacy games, as PS Now is currently, should just fall under a $10/month subscription service. They're old titles that aren't being bought anymore so the main cost they have to cover is server maintenance. A rental service just doesn't work here and won't be widely adopted as it is in the open beta.

what the heck is a legacy game though? Anything older than the PS4? You havent defined that and that gives a lot of leeway. Would this apply to PS3 games? Those are still selling. Even PS1 and PS2 games sell as they are frequently seen charting in the PS Blogs monthly list of best selling titles. The publishers do make money via redistributing them on PSN or even remastering old titles for retail release . Sony may be down to just offer their unlimited access to their titles for a small fee, but really how many publishers would be willing to do that? I see more follow in EA's lead and create their own system than go under Sony's

 

[Poetic Chaos]

Those prices were for new AAA games. I don't know how they'd scale for smaller titles but I think those are fair prices for brand new games if you don't wanna pay the full price to own it. Anything cheaper would hurt sales. You could beat any single player campaign within a week which after that point, most people are done with a game. $30 is a fair price for that.

Yes, legacy games are any game from older generations including PS3. I don't know anyone buying new PS3 games. Everyone is buying used at this point, which no one profits from but Gamestop so I don't see why publishers wouldn't just take what Sony gives them for their old titles.

And I'd fully support others following EA's lead because the value it provides will only grow with more titles added to the Vault. EA Access is gonna be a great service with great value. More value than I see in PS Now as it currently is.

 

[Tron Bonne]

I doubt there's no one is buying new PS3 games. Cross gen big games are still a thing, so I'm guessing there's plenty of new sales for the PS3/360 at the moment.

 

[Havok83]

Those prices were for new AAA games. I don't know how they'd scale for smaller titles but I think those are fair prices for brand new games if you don't wanna pay the full price to own it. Anything cheaper would hurt sales. You could beat any single player campaign within a week which after that point, most people are done with a game. $30 is a fair price for that.

That's almost as bad if not worse than what Sony currently has up. Why would anyone pay to rent a game for $30? You can find MUCH cheaper options locally or via a service like Gamefly. Most new games can be found for about $40 within a month or 2 of release so pricing

Yes, legacy games are any game from older generations including PS3. I don't know anyone buying new PS3 games. Everyone is buying used at this point, which no one profits from but Gamestop so I don't see why publishers wouldn't just take what Sony gives them for their old titles.

You do realize that there are 80M PS3s out there vs the what 8-9 PS4s? Where are you getting data that no one is buying new PS3 games and that everyone is buying them used from Gamestop? This statement is a big WTF. The last big title to be released was Watch Dogs and it did nearly 2 million on PS3/360. Prior to that Dark Souls did 900K on the PS3. Exactly how is PS3 gaming dead? The system is still getting new releases
and yes the games are selling new.

And I'd fully support others following EA's lead because the value it provides will only grow with more titles added to the Vault. EA Access is gonna be a great service with great value. More value than I see in PS Now as it currently is.

Well I don't think the two services are meant to be comparable. For one Now is a streaming service that allows you to access PS games across multiple devices. EA Access is a limited download service that allows you to access EA titles just on the X1. Its library is limited to EA titles on the X1 which is not only small but not diverse at all as their releases tend to primarily be sports and Battlefield with the occasional RPG every few years. Now cant offer the free for all access you are suggesting. If they did that then there wouldn't be any point to even having the rentals

I doubt there's no one is buying new PS3 games. Cross gen big games are still a thing, so I'm guessing there's plenty of new sales for the PS3/360 at the moment.

Heck my most played purchase this year is the FFX/X-2 HD Remaster which Im currently playing

 

[Poetic Chaos]

Are any of those cross gen games available on Now currently? Like Stick of Truth or Dark Souls 2? Because yeah, games that new are probably still selling but I don't expect them to be on Now.

 

[Tron Bonne]

I don't think either Stick of Truth or Dark Souls 2 are cross gen. But talking about PS3 games, in general, I meant. If we're talking just older games, you might be right.

 

[Havok83]

Are any of those cross gen games available on Now currently? Like Stick of Truth or Dark Souls 2? Because yeah, games that new are probably still selling but I don't expect them to be on Now.

Neither of those are cross gen titles. PS Now isn't limited to old games. Ultra Street Fighter IV, which just came out is available through it

 

[Poetic Chaos]

Cross gen was the wrong word, I just meant newer PS3 games in general. Ones that people would buy new. When you can buy the entire Uncharted trilogy for under $20 used, I don't know why anyone would buy new. But that's an assumption on my part. Either way. The point is PS Now is not gonna work as a rental service. These were my suggestions for fixing it that would appeal to me. I would like an option to rent new games and subscribe to old ones. That's the only system I see working on a wide scale.

 

[XtremelyBaneful]

so... still no flat rate?

 

[TX85]

Great concept but the execution would hurt them,It sure won't interest unless it got a subscription fee

 

[StrainedEyes]

Eh, I think the prices are fine right now, at least the extended ones. The 4 hour pricing is absurd, though, like legit crazy. But paying 6-7 bucks for a week with a game is not that bad.

I think what they should do is give PS+ members like 1 free rental a month or something like that.

 

[TX85]

IF they remove the 4 hour pricing or at least make all games $1 for 4 hours and keep the week&90 day deals plus add a free game rental for PS Plus subscribers then I'd be cool with that.

The game selection right now is not too bad but some major AAA titles would sure be nice,IF they had some Batman Arkham or Uncharted games I'd consider buying a PSN card to rent them

 

[Poetic Chaos]

I'd get a PS TV if this turns into something more viable than it is currently.

 

[hippie_hunter]

THIS! Hopefully this is all a bad joke and Sony switches things up to make PSNow the netflix of gaming.

Sony is working on doing that. I think that's the biggest reason why they turned down EA Access because of their plans to do the same with PlayStation Now.

 

[flickchick85]

The game selection right now is not too bad but some major AAA titles would sure be nice,IF they had some Batman Arkham or Uncharted games I'd consider buying a PSN card to rent them

This. I've only played a few games on the PSNow trial, but as soon as they started adding prices to them I stopped, primarily because there weren't any marquee games I was dying to play. If they got the Arkham games or Uncharted on there, I'd be all over this in a heartbeat even with the pay-per-game prices.