xKilltheMx
Member
You are skeptical. Its perfectly serviceable, sounds great, plays great.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
PS NOW. Rentals from US$2.99 to US$19.99.
- Thread starter Guymelef
- Start date
You are skeptical. Its perfectly serviceable, sounds great, plays great.
Don't you have to purchase those PC games first?
No, it's very similar to what people want from PSNow, there's some games that are part of the subscription, and some that aren't. You can buy a license to games outright, and some have rental periods as well.
jim-jam bongs
Member
They offer two services, PlayPack and CloudLift. With the former you pay a subscription to access a selected set of around 300+ games for a flat monthly fee, with the latter you buy games from Steam and get access to them remotely (as well as actually owning the Steam version).
Ok, so you're saying it's worth it for that one scenario, where someone has literally nothing that can play it, no PC or laptop at all. Sony are not just putting PSNow on TVs, they are also putting it on PS4, PS3, PSV, and PSTV, all of which are games consoles. So they need to appeal to those people as well, or else why would they put them on those devices.
it's worth it on any of those devices listed. less-so PS3
jim-jam bongs
Member
Hey, if you have a recent TV with Miracast support you could even stream it wirelessly from your phone or tablet and play using your DS4 via Bluetooth. But by all means keep narrowing the acceptable use-cases so that you can continue defending this horrible pricing.
that sounds terrible. c'mon
Caayn
Member
You can play it on a TV without additional hardware, it just needs to be a LG TV (currently the only supported brand). Just like you can play PS Now on a TV without additional hardware, it just needs to be a Sony TV.
No it's not, because those systems have other games, that are priced appropriately.
I specifically meant no additional hardware besides the PS4 I already have
If there's a PS3 game on PSNow that id like to play and all I have is a PS4, it's a good value
jim-jam bongs
Member
Okay. In that single use-case, the pricing is acceptable though "good value" might be stretching it. For absolutely every single other use-case in the known universe it's complete and utter steaming dogshit.
No, it's not. They're old games. Just because they're playable on a new system does not increase their value. They're the same games. If PS1 and PS2 classics had been horribly overpriced on the PS3, no one would have played them. But they reasonably priced them, and people agreed and bought them.
so if arguably PS4 is how the majority of people will use PSNow, the pricing is acceptable.
seems okay to me
dont forget vita and pstv
jim-jam bongs
Member
Just as a reminder, you're essentially arguing here that the pricing is acceptable because you have no other choice but to deal with it.
It's 5.1? How compressed is the video/audio? How is the lag for something like Street Fighter? There's no way in hell I'd ever rent a game over the internet, I'm just trying to measure why a normal person who doesn't own a PS3 would ever use this service.
and you can play one game across all of those platforms seamlessly! I don't know, I see added value there but obviously a lot of people don't so clearly Sony is going to run into issues.
I guess? I mean you can word most things in such a way so that they sound bad. Without PSNow, my only option to play certain PS3 games is to lug out my console from the basement (or buy one if I didn't already have one). At least now I have another option. Lastly, I can elect to just never use the service. No one is forcing it on me
If PSNow is a failure, I'm worried it'll be because of a combination of: perceived value of software being way too low in general and a swollen sense of entitlement
anyway I'll get off my soapbox on this subject, the last thing I want is to gain a reputation as a shill for Sony
jim-jam bongs
Member
Bad things can certainly be worded in such a way that they sound bad. And my main point here is that your particular use-case is not a big enough one for Sony to be able to counteract the pricing complaints which have characterised the PS Now beta to date. I'd be extremely shocked if a lot of people in your position share your point-of-view either, most PS4 owners who still have a PS3 in the house would be more likely to grab a used copy of a game and plug their old console in to play it than spend $20 on a time limited version of it which is running remotely (with all the disadvantages that involves).
Obviously you're also free to avoid using the service, but again that's not really a counter-argument to the suggestion that the pricing is terrible.
... or because their prices are just too fucking high. Sometimes it's not everyone else's fault, it's yours.
I think this whole thread turned shit because instead of speaking from your own POV, people realized that a service like this has limited benefit to a hardcore gamer and instead switched to speaking from a average consumers POV. It's okay to dislike something and voice discontent if something sounds like it's something you'll never use. That should still be okay. I'd never use On Live either when I can just as easily buy a damn game from steam on sale.
CreeperBlocks
Banned
So i just got in the beta... when do the rentals that are playable rotate?
It's not the service, it's the prices. I'm a hardcore gamer, but I would totally use PSNow, especially on the Vita, cause I prefer to play games on my Vita, if the prices aren't total shit. But they are.
fair enough. agree to disagree then. it will be interesting to see the whole thing play out
what does that even mean? make it all free?
Memorabilia
Member
Making it "reasonable" would be a start. It seems to me the general consensus on this pricing plan is a double thumbs down. The market will correct this mistake for Sony as time marches on. But it'd be nice if they started with something that isnt insulting.
Or pay $50 and keep it forever when the remastered version version come out.
Ok I didnt think of this. coldone has a very good point. Say if you have your TV only to play games and you just want to play one really good PS3 game without the actual hardware without owning any Sony consoles in the past. Interesting.
mattiewheels
And then the LORD David Bowie saith to his Son, Jonny Depp: 'Go, and spread my image amongst the cosmos. For every living thing is in anguish and only the LIGHT shall give them reprieve.'
I'm curious about what they'll do with games you already bought digitally on PS3. Like, I own Knytt Underground, and I see that little 'owned' icon with playable next to it. If they let me stream everything on PS4 I already bought, this service is for me. Otherwise I'm just not their target.
Any word on buying the right to stream something outright?
Any word on buying the right to stream something outright?
Winter John
Gold Member
That's a very good point. We have a bunch of digital PS3 games. I don't think I would pay a subscription to play them again, especially as there's a ps3 lurking around somewhere, but a one off activation fee would seem like a reasonable compromise.
mattiewheels
And then the LORD David Bowie saith to his Son, Jonny Depp: 'Go, and spread my image amongst the cosmos. For every living thing is in anguish and only the LIGHT shall give them reprieve.'
I have a feeling their subscription plan will have something to do with this stuff. Well, the service is great so far, I played some Onlive back in the day and I wasn't prepared for how beautifully this service would work. Never glitches, full res and sounds normal. The lag is better in some games then others but I'm seriously impressed so far.
I can see the value in it for people who don't own a PS2/3 but for me personally I will hold on to my PS3 until there is nothing new worth playing, I rarely replay anything so there is minimal value for me.
If they release new PS4 games on the service day 1 then there will be much more value in it for me, but I don't see that happening.
hodayathink
Member
Unless the service completely tanks, it will happen. The question is whether it'll be 6 months from now or 3 years from now.
Louis Cyphre
Banned
Which is why the service is set up to fail. You won't be getting new titles. They should be offering a $99 per year option for unlimited play.
Killing_Joke
Member
Guess no one brought it up yet but prices dropped.
4hr-$3
week - $6
month- $8
3 months-$15
There's a tiny few that have the old prices but they seem to include DLC as well. There's also a handful of free games as well.
4hr-$3
week - $6
month- $8
3 months-$15
There's a tiny few that have the old prices but they seem to include DLC as well. There's also a handful of free games as well.
Louis Cyphre
Banned
Any pics? Seems like a very strange pricing model.
That seems much more reasonable. But i still dont think the prices make sense. Why would i rent for 4 hours when i could just rent for a week and actually beat the game?
I guess maybe to rent a local coop game if i have friends over?
And why rent for a week when a month is only 3 more dollars?
For a party before the pay-per view match. Kids Summer party, hotels. World cup is another great example, lot people would be happy to just play FIFA without needing to shell out a full $60 for the game.
It is good have that option.
StanleyStutters
Member
Good, this is much better. $8 a month for previous generation games is fair to me.
That's the magic of the marketing. They want you to go for the highest amount possible.
Also, 3 dollars for 4 hours is actually really good if we compare it to going to see a movie (10 bucks for 2 hours).
