Support NeoGAF

[OuterLimits]

I'm not sure. The fact that mobile gaming is booming must in part at least be down to the fact that everyone has a smartphone. It's simple, it's cheap and it's almost immediate for most mobile style games. The fact that everyone has a phone which can access these games is huge, and I believe a bigger factor than the nature of the games you find on mobiles. Give the average person the ability to get into console style games via their smart tv or even a tablet, cheaply, with no $300 up front purchase required and there's some potential there.

For me personally I feel like the service would be great for effectively demo-ing game types I'd never normally go out and buy. I can see myself getting into something I'd never be willing to spend £30-£50 just to try, the immediate access being a huge bonus as well as once you download that 20GB file you might not be feeling all that bothered about playing, the moment has passed.

Most casual gamers on tablets and phones are content playing free games. Hell, some of them complain when a game is priced higher than $5. I don't see many spending $15 to $20 a month to rent some PS3 games.

Also, the price of PS3 games and the console itself will continue to drop over the next year or two making the price of the rental service even worse in comparison.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think there is a large amount of people out there clamoring to rent PS3 games on their TV and other devices.

 

[GraveRobberX]

Why do people keep going $180/year, too much for me

You do realize you can stop and grab the 3 month package over time
Why would you keep adding 3 months more, over and over if it isn't to your liking

Grab 3 months, get 20-40 games out of those 3 months sounds outstanding
You can then wait till the library refreshes over 3 months, and do it again

No where does it say you have to drop $45 every 3 months for a year to get the most benefit out of PSNow

Some of you guys really try to stretch shit out and make yourself already start disbelieving that it's "Worth It"

 

[jblank83]

$15 a month to play old PS3 games with input latency and possible resolution drops due to network problems, on top of having to pay to play PS4 games online with PS Plus.

Not interested and irritated at Sony's online tactics for the PS4.

Thank god for the fans who dedicate themselves to writing emulators.

 

[Agent X]

The pricing is a bit higher than I would have hoped for. $20 per month is a bit steep. $15 per month (what you get in 3 month bundles) is more reasonable.

The initial game list is a little underwhelming for me, personally speaking. While there are some solid games on the list, most of the games that interest me are ones that I already own. Of the games that I don't already own, there are only a handful that I'd bother with.

I'll still keep an eye on the subscription service. It's good that they're offering a free trial--I'll give it a whirl for sure. Hopefully they'll continue to expand it by adding more great games.

 

[Pandora012]

$15 a month to play old PS3 games with input latency and possible resolution drops due to network problems, on top of having to pay to play PS4 games online with PS Plus.

Not interested and irritated at Sony's online tactics for the PS4.

Thank god for the fans who dedicate themselves to writing emulators.

Well if it helps, they say they'll add Ps1 and Ps2 games.

 

[Irishmantis]

Question!

Does anybody know if its possible to share like Netflix or will it be tied to your PS4 account? (which i imagine)

 

[hamchan]

$15 a month is good pricing.

 

[Ranger X]

The pricing for a subscription itself is good. But they should let you play games without subscription and for free as long as you put the PS3 disc into the PS4. Now THAT would be awesome.

 

[TheBryanJZX90]

I think this would be a fair price for a selection of streaming titles, but only if it had way more than 100 titles and from all past PlayStation generations.

 

[7DollarHagane]

I think the library will continue to grow if this proves successful.

I can see this being worth it to a certain group of people. $44.99 for 3 months of clearing out games that you probably missed from last gen is pretty fair. A lot less than you'd pay to buy them.

 

[7DollarHagane]

The pricing for a subscription itself is good. But they should let you play games without subscription and for free as long as you put the PS3 disc into the PS4. Now THAT would be awesome.

There is zero business sense to do this. The infrastructure for the streaming service was very expensive to set up. This would just prompt people to buy used copies of those games at gamestop instead of pay sony to play them on PS4.

It sucks that PS4 isn't backwards compatible but it's just not possible with how different the hardware is. It would have added $100 or more to the cost of the PS4 to add the PS3 hardware in the box.

 

[Carn82]

I just get out and buy the actual game if I enjoyed it.

Ding, that's the business model right there. It's a way to lock in people with a subscription, and/or push them forward to buy the games. Wouldn't surprise me if they add ps+ discounts down the road. Of course, the quality needs to be decent, but decent is enough for the target demographics.

 

[MightyHedgehog]

Well if it helps, they say they'll add Ps1 and Ps2 games.

For non-action and slower action games, this would help justify the slightly high cost, but I think the issue may be that the older the game, the more sensitive to latency they tend to be as they were designed and intended to be played locally on low latency CRTs with no-latency wired controllers. It's too bad this is Sony's first major push into game streaming since original, built-for-online games would be the best candidates for the tech, like MMOs and other online-focused titles.

 

[Ninja Scooter]

The pricing for a subscription itself is good. But they should let you play games without subscription and for free as long as you put the PS3 disc into the PS4. Now THAT would be awesome.

That makes no sense.

 

[durrrrrrrrrr]

looks like a complete joke. PS3 games are 5 - 20 on Craigslist or shopping mall bins

 

[Ninja Scooter]

looks like a complete joke. PS3 games are 5 - 20 on Craigslist or shopping mall bins

Because everyone wants to troll around shopping malls or craigslist to get their fix.

 

[ShogunX]

Do these games have online enabled and if so is PS+ required to use it?

Anyone?

 

[Synth]

Anyone?

The games will have online functionality if a standard copy would still have online access. They won't require PS+ as that's not a requirement for playing PS3 games online.

The combined latency may be brutal however.

 

[Jotamide]

Nothing like I would've expected this to be. I thought Sony would do something akin to Nintendo: if you own a Wii VC game that is available on Wii U, you pay a small fee to upgrade. I wish Sony would've let us upgrade our existing PSN purchases to be available on PS Now. I don't see myself paying for 2 subscriptions, fuck that.

 

[Ingueferroque]

Don't forget that this service will come to televisions, PSTV, and Vita as well. And possibly some tablet devices. That makes it far more exciting, because I'm personally not too charmed by streaming games on my PS4.

 

[breakfuss]

Then you are clearly not the audience i was referring to. A lot of consumers (id bet a majority) don't use Netflix to "complement" their physical movie collection. It's replaxed their collection. Same thing with pandora and spotify for music. I'm sure a lot of enthusiasts will get ps now subs to "complement" their game collections. But there is a reason sony is putting this thing in TVs and phones rather than tying it to ps plus or playstation consoles. They want mass market exposure. A subscription will likely get them that far easier than some ala carte model.

Damn, dude how many times did you need to point out my misspelling 'complement' lol? No worries, just "replaxed" it.

I worded my point poorly. People may not purchase home video as often, but I don't think they're solely relying on Netflix. They're still going to the movie theater. Using a la carte services like Redbox and on-demand.

When I say I'm an enthusiast I mean that I watch and listen to tons of shit from a myriad of sources, not that I have a lavish collection of blu rays and vinyl lol. I may go weeks without even touching Netflix but the $8-$10/mo. it costs makes that okay. Again, it complements my habits. At $15 or $20 that model becomes less appealing. Especially when the selection is so meager and old. I'm assuming Sony wants to lock in tons of long-term subscribers, no?

 

[Ingueferroque]

Nothing like I would've expected this to be. I thought Sony would do something akin to Nintendo: if you own a Wii VC game that is available on Wii U, you pay a small fee to upgrade. I wish Sony would've let us upgrade our existing PSN purchases to be available on PS Now. I don't see myself paying for 2 subscriptions, fuck that.

You mostly pay for the streaming service, not so much the game license. They can't start giving away streaming games because they would be losing money on bandwith.

And are you fucking kidding me? Sony is the one offering cross-buy/play to MANY PSN titles. I've had a ton of free upgrades over the last year, going both ways. PS4 -> Vita and Vita -> PS4. This is not one of the things where Sony has to learn from Nintendo. Nintendo has nothing to teach anyone concerning cross-buy or their horrible handling of VC and digital releases.

 

[ger]

The 3 month pricing is fair. Add Valkyria Chronicles, Dragon's Dogma, and a few more JRPGs and I'm in.

 

[Shpeshal Nick]

Because everyone wants to troll around shopping malls or craigslist to get their fix.

There are frequently sales on digital titles too. Not everyone with a PS4 bought one to play "tonnes of PS3 games!!!!", most of which they were never interested to begin with, could already own or don't have time to play.

Would work out cheaper int he long run to buy a second hand PS3, your Plus sub gives you free games every month (that aren't streamed) and for the games you actually want, buy them on sale and OWN them.

Outside of fanboys who look for reasons to give Sony money and people with too much money, this service has a very very narrow audience. But good luck to them though, they need all the revenue streams they can get right now.

 

[Prototype]

I was hoping for $10 a month, with like a year long sub.

 

[Ninja Scooter]

Damn, dude how many times did you need to point out my misspelling 'complement' lol? No worries, just "replaxed" it.

I worded my point poorly. People may not purchase home video as often, but I don't think they're solely relying on Netflix. They're still going to the movie theater. Using a la carte services like Redbox and on-demand.

When I say I'm an enthusiast I mean that I watch and listen to tons of shit from a myriad of sources, not that I have a lavish collection of blu rays and vinyl lol. I may go weeks without even touching Netflix but the $8-$10/mo. it costs makes that okay. Again, it complements my habits. At $15 or $20 that model becomes less appealing. Especially when the selection is so meager and old. I'm assuming Sony wants to lock in tons of long-term subscribers, no?

lol I wasn't trying to point it out lol mispelled it myself

I get what you are saying I'm not saying PSNow is ONLY for casuals just that Sony seems to be thinking broader with it. They aren't trying to target people looking for BC or game collections. They want people to use this on their tablets and phones. Hell I said earlier I think the price point is good but it by no means means I'm gonna sub myself. Want to see a more fleshed out library first.

 

[Afrikan]

Don't forget that this service will come to televisions, PSTV, and Vita as well. And possibly some tablet devices. That makes it far more exciting, because I'm personally not too charmed by streaming games on my PS4.

it was very weird seeing Samsung CES press conference today, with the presenter talking about their Flag Ship TV and how you can game blockbuster titles....without the need of a console, thankx to their support of PSnow service.

 

[mohsinkhan]

Do we have a list of the games on the subscription service?

 

[Hubble]

It's a great first step but I still think the price is too pricey for PS3 older games.

 

[Bastion]

One thing PSNow needs more than anything is save states. I am playing Final Fantasy 13 via PSNow currently and I have wasted a lot of time replaying parts of the game because if my internet connection drops below required levels there is nothing I can do if there isn't a save point close.

 

[Afrikan]

some talked about this before, but PSnow doesn't seem marketed to the usual Playstation owners... especially PS4.

it is more marketed to everyone else who doesn't own a PS4/PS3...or just playstation systems... and would like to try a game or two... or just add a similar Netflix type service to their subs.

if this was exclusively for PS4/PS3 owners......I have a feeling that the price model would be more expensive.....but since they are going after different customers, they know a more expensive price model would not work at all.

I remember someone mentioning, that this service would be great for Hotels, and their rooms can come with PlayStation controllers.....and someone could quickly game, instead of watching a movie..when they are away.

what I don't understand is the wording chosen for the $45 for 3 months deal..

they should've just said $15 a month... *with 3 months required*

 

[Dr. Kitty Muffins]

I still prefer owning games. This new subscription service isn't enough to change my mind. If it cost as much as Netflix and I had access to everything then I might change my tune.

 

[Tagyhag]

Not a bad price, could be cheaper though.

The service will live or die based on its library, I predict it will do quite well.

 

[Usobuko]

I won't doubt what people are willing to pay for convenience sake.

 

[Shpeshal Nick]

I won't doubt what people are willing to pay for convenience sake.

To me, once this service manages to add PS1/2 and 4 games, it will be fantastic for those who own only a Vita or no console at all and can just stream this on their mobile, TV, tablet etc.

It would also be good for someone who ONLY owns a PS4 and nothign else.

Otherwise this is useless and overpriced (assuming you consistently resub). But hey, there's nothing wrong with having options.

 

[nullpoynter]

The pricing for a subscription itself is good. But they should let you play games without subscription and for free as long as you put the PS3 disc into the PS4. Now THAT would be awesome.

Bandwidth and setting up a server infrastructure to handle the streaming service is not free.

 

[pachuco]

Good price point, but as a Playstation Plus member it's hard to find games that weren't part of that subscription on this new service.

I'll wait a little longer to see if things get better. (Kinda like EA Access)

 

[The_Dama]

Any news on PS2 and PS1 games? Also, why cant we just buy the game instead of renting them?

 

[Creaking]

Any news on PS2 and PS1 games? Also, why cant we just buy the game instead of renting them?

Costs money for them to stream stuff to you whenever. Theoretically, the money you spent buying the game would at some point stop covering the costs of what they spend maintaining their service to stream it to you.

It's kind of similar to why some multiplayer games get their servers shut down. They've got to remain profitable.

 

[The One and Done™]

Sony on that Sega Channel shit. I like it

 

[Disaster Nebraska]

Based on the list there are a number of games (fighters, for instance) that I wouldn't play due to inherent lag, like DoA5, BlazBlue, or Skullgirls.

There are also a number of games that I wouldn't bother playing due to the time commitment to really "get into it". Pretty much all of the RPGs on the list are outskies for that reason alone.

But what remains is pretty decent for someone who wants to try some niche titles and/or have the convenience of games in one place, regardless of platform. In that regard, RPGs actually wouldn't be so bad if you enjoy the portability of PSNow (play it on PS4, then maybe move save to PS Vita, then maybe use your tablet or something like that, etc)

Considering it is pretty much the only console streaming service available right now, let's see how it develops. I imagine if Nintendo or Microsoft jumped into this format, Sony would be forced to reevaluate the price. Maybe,

 

[serversurfer]

These price points will make nice gift cards, like the PS+ cards you can nab at Walmart.

 

[Azriell]

It's a pretty great price, honestly. I could see myself buying a 3 month subscription instead of a game at some point, and then binging for a few months. If you can beat even 2 games a month, that's 6 games for $45.

 

[Illucio]

$15 a month for 3 months is not too bad considering what your getting in the end. This is nothing like Elder Scrolls or World of Worldcraft because instead of getting 1 game your getting a huge backlog of games to play, most of them pretty recent.

I might actually try this out....

 

[RedAssedApe]

did i misread something or is the subscription service a rotating catalog of games?

 

[Rain City Gamer]

did i misread something or is the subscription service a rotating catalog of games?

It is not rotating, but as of now it is a little bit different than what is currently available as rentals. Most overlap but some do not and there are also games that are only available through the sub and not rental. It will be added to moving forward.

EDIT:
here is the list:
http://community.us.playstation.com/t5/PlayStation-Now/PlayStation-Now-Title-List/td-p/44466574

should add the list to the OP.

 

[DrRussian]

I wish they would let you buy the game on the service and stream it whenever you want to in addition to the rental model.

 

[antisoulless]

This is awesome. But I feel like I have every ps3 game I want to play.
Still... If they get psp, ps1 and ps2 games up. It'll be pretty much the best thing ever.

 

[bobbytkc]

That's cool and all, but I will probably never get to try this service cuz I live in Asia. What about us Sony?

 

[RadarScope1]

I'll echo what many others have said: it's a decent price point if maybe a little bit high. With a slightly lower price and more games coming on board it becomes even more attractive. Still, I think for a lot of core gamers and savvy players (like us on GAF) it's better to just have a PS3. Especially since PS 1/2 games aren't in the mix (and I still am firm in my belief that it's a waste of resources to stream old, small games).

To me, the net positive is that Sony has made a subscription option available. That is absolutely the right move. If it comes down a little or if discounts are offered to PS+ members, then so much the better.

I'm looking forward to a free trial later this month.