Jump to content

Why is Gamepass considered so much better than PSNow?


Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, therearerules said:

The problem with lists of games added is there's a whole load of chaff on both services, and it ignores what's already on there. Evil Within 1 has been added to GP, for example, but Evil Within 1 & 2 are both on PSNow.

 

Again, Evil Within has about 11 months left on PSNow at most given that it's now a series owned by Microsoft.

 

Evil Within 2 isn't on game pass yet as Sony have signed an exclusivity deal, as soon as that's run its course it'll also be on GP.

 

As others have said though, until Sony commits to bringing all new first party games to PSNow the day they are released it'll always be an inferior service.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, partious said:

If/when microsoft actually start releasing quality first party games in significant enough quantities perhaps I'll change my mind, but for now I don't quite get the appeal of either unless you are incredibly time rich and happy to play whatever's there, as opposed to some specific games you actually want to play, or are just lucky enough to have constant overlap of the two. 

 

Posting lists of non-new release 3rd party and indie games makes little sense to me. Things you can pick up for peanuts in the 50 sales per year and actually own.

Like I said, there are definitely people for whom gamepass is great value, but I think it's far from a majority of adult gamers. If you have mountains of free time and sit around ploughing through single player games (but only the ones on the subscription service, if you spend 100 hours on Cyberpunk/Breath of the Wild 2, you're still paying the subscription for a month or two of an unused service) then it probably makes a lot of financial sense. 

 

The people I know with gamepass seem more inclined to marvel at how many games there are on the service and how great value it is, but not actually play enough of them to make it actual significant value for money for them as a subscription service. This is assuming the actual price of gamepass, not the temporary heavy discount. 

 

There's a psychological aspect to these subscription services too. They play on the idea of how much you could potentially play/watch/listen to, as opposed to reality of how you'll fit that into your life. 

 

 I had psplus for nearly 6 years despite not being an online gamer at all. I used to marvel at the "free" monthly games and it was only after I eventually cancelled the subscription that I realised I'd paid hundreds of pounds, completed about 5 old games from it that I could have bought in sales for a few quid each and owned nothing once I stopped paying the subscription. 

 

 

 

We've had this discussion a million times. GamePass users still buy games they're really interested in (which tends to be most third party AAA releases they're interested in as they don't usually come to GamePass). So I personally still buy, I would guess, about 10 retail games a year? A mixture of Nintendo games/Sony exclusives and third party games. Everything else in between those games I play on Gamepass. 

 

It seems to me that people for whom GamePass doesn't work/appeal (which is perfectly fine) often try to force their way of thinking onto others. You're doing it in your post right now. I don't just marvel at the list of games, I am constantly playing Gamepass games in between the retail games I'm interested in. I don't care if I don't play a Gamepass game for a month because I'm playing retail games in much the same way I'm not going to cancel Netflix if I don't watch anything on there for a month because I'm watching stuff on other streaming services.

 

6 hours ago, therearerules said:

The problem with lists of games added is there's a whole load of chaff on both services, and it ignores what's already on there. Evil Within 1 has been added to GP, for example, but Evil Within 1 & 2 are both on PSNow.

 

Yes but it's about relative levels of support. PSNow gets about 3-6 new games a month and some of them are ancient. When you're only adding 5 game during a month and one of them is Infamous Second Son - a first party game from 2014 - and another is a Call of Duty game from 2015 it speaks volumes. What I also didn't mention was how short some of those games are due to stay on the service. Sony tend to be much more upfront about when games leave the service, to their credit, and both Ace Combat 7 and Black Ops 3 are scheduled to leave the service after 2-3 months. No games leave GamePass that quickly. So you're getting a six year old Call of Duty game for 2-3 months, that's a really meagre offering at best.

 

Look more closely at the lists again and see how many day and date releases there are on the GamePass list, or how many games are launching within a fairly short time-frame of release by comparison. One service is clearly a priority for the platform holder in a way the other isn't and that's reflected in the relative levels of discourse about the two. 

 

If your service has a steady stream of newer games, more people will talk about it. There is nothing to talk about when you're releasing a small handful of relatively ancient games on your platform that everyone and their mother played years ago.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Does PS Now include the ability to play online? Or do I need plus for that too?

 

I genuinely had no idea there were that many games available to download and play. I thought it was primarily a streaming service with a couple of games available to download thrown in.

 

I'm paid up until 2023 with Game Pass Ultimate so that'll do anyway but I'm still curious.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Majora said:

 

We've had this discussion a million times. GamePass users still buy games they're really interested in (which tends to be most third party AAA releases they're interested in as they don't usually come to GamePass). So I personally still buy, I would guess, about 10 retail games a year? A mixture of Nintendo games/Sony exclusives and third party games. Everything else in between those games I play on Gamepass. 

 

It seems to me that people for whom GamePass doesn't work/appeal (which is perfectly fine) often try to force their way of thinking onto others. You're doing it in your post right now. I don't just marvel at the list of games, I am constantly playing Gamepass games in between the retail games I'm interested in. I don't care if I don't play a Gamepass game for a month because I'm playing retail games in much the same way I'm not going to cancel Netflix if I don't watch anything on there for a month because I'm watching stuff on other streaming services.

 

Not trying to force my opinion on others, just stating it in a thread about streaming services. Has been mentioned in other threads before, sure, but we've also had plenty of "gamepass is such amazing unbelieveable value, lets all talk about how great this currently heavily discounted subscription service is" type discussions too. 

 

Anyway, I don't come close to getting through 10 retail games in a year, never mind being able to get value out of a subscription service on top of that, so I guess we're coming at this from different perspectives. 

I just think those of us who don't get through huge numbers of games need to look past the hype and the idea of "500 games for a tenner a month" and think about how many of those we'll actually get through each month and that all those tenners a month add up to hundreds over a few years.

 

To actually give my opinion on the question in the OP, I'd say it's a combination of a number of things. 

Gamepass IS clearly better than PSNOW as will be obvious to anyone who compares the game lists. 

PSNOW has a lot of negative baggage from when it was just a half baked streaming service/excuse for the ps4 to have no PS3 BC and sony probably should have renamed/relaunched it.  Xbox series x/s currently have no exclusives so Microsoft and those who enjoy engaging in console related discussion can spend more time promoting/hyping gamepass. 

Gamepass is currently being offered at an extremely steep discount and the vast majority of people here haven't paid the "real" price for the service yet, so of course people are going to be happy with the value for money.   

 

I think the difference between game subscriptions and netflix etc is that games (other than Nintendo ones) tank in price after a few months and can be picked up for a pittance in the many many sales that happen regularly throughout the year. Also, with all the talk of overwhelming backlogs among gamers, it surprises me that people are so impressed by having access to a bunch of oldish 3rd party games (the exclusives will be a bigger deal when they eventually arrive). I fear the rise in popularity of subscriptions will reduce the number of firesales or the level of discount and if you want to play some game that's a year or more old you'll need to get that company's subscription service instead of buying it for tuppence in a sale. 

 

But to be honest, reading over this post, I do actually think I'm inadvertantly derailing the discussion if I continue in this thread, which wasn't my intention, so I'll bow out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think most of the main points have been put already in the thread. However I would summarise as...

  • Many Day 1 releases on GP. Not so on PSNow. 
  • The lifecycle of non MS games on there makes it feel fresher rather than just the piles of old stuff (along with a smaller selection of newer stuff) on PSNow. 
  • The investment and marketing going into GP is far superior so the service feels like it means something

I have not got a PS5 at the moment but when I do, if I can get it for say £40 a year I will probably sub to PS Now. Especially if they expand it. 

 

It's just not in Sonys interest to invest in it right now. They are sticking with their AAA model. It will be interesting to see over the next 5 years if this is an arrogant mistake or if both models can co-exist peacefully. I'm not sure they can in the long run. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The algorithm that I am developing to provide game suggestions, works with game pass, psnow and other subscription services. I haven't bothered updating psnow recently because tracking them as a comparison for over 18 months and psnow games rarely made the top 20 overall, with game pass filling the majority of the other spots. Occasionally a psnow game would jump to near the top when an exclusive was temporarily put on the service (spider-man for example) but on the whole, assessed as a service for experiencing the best that current gaming has to offer, psnow is way, way behind the competition. Psnow is currently more of a legacy game library, which is a fantastic idea in its own right, but is not a competitor to game pass.

 

Sony's support for psnow has gone to shit in recent months too, with a much greater focus on psplus and play at home. I think Sony have decided not to tackle the juggernaut that is game pass and hope that it doesn't completely smash through their gaming platform. Honestly, it feels a little like Kodak and the digital camera era where they were the first to develop the technology but their business infrastructure and market dominance crippled their ability to adapt. Sony were well ahead in the subscription service 'game' at the start and they threw it all away.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BeeJay said:

 

I think Sony have decided not to tackle the juggernaut that is game pass and hope that it doesn't completely smash through their gaming platform. Honestly, it feels a little like Kodak and the digital camera era where they were the first to develop the technology but their business infrastructure and market dominance crippled their ability to adapt. Sony were well ahead in the subscription service 'game' at the start and they threw it all away.


 

I think what really worries Sony is that if subscription services win out as the future of gaming, then it is not just MS and Nintendo they have to worry about as competitors.  As before they know it Google, Amazon, Apple, Facebook, Disney, Netflix and f**k knows who else will be trampling all over their patch.  
 

Ultimately It is probably the wrong strategy, but for now they are like Cnute forlornly trying to hold back the tide.

Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Waggo said:


 

I think what really worries Sony is that if subscription services win out as the future of gaming, then it is not just MS and Nintendo they have to worry about as competitors.  As before they know it Google, Amazon, Apple, Facebook, Disney, Netflix and f**k knows who else will be trampling all over their patch.  
 

Ultimately It is probably the wrong strategy, but for now they are like Cnute forlornly trying to hold back the tide.


In that case Microsoft will face those same competitors, it will make it harder to attract games to GP on such favourable terms.  I think it will come down to original content, for which MS are currently in catch-up mode with Sony.

Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, scoobysi said:


In that case Microsoft will face those same competitors, it will make it harder to attract games to GP on such favourable terms.  I think it will come down to original content, for which MS are currently in catch-up mode with Sony.

 

Which is basically why they bought Bethesda for $7bn - and they were open about this too, Phil said it was to compete with Google and Amazon, who they see as their main competition in future.

 

This was before Google did their classic Google move of shutting all their Stadia studios after 12 months, mind.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Gamepass has all future xbox first party titles on day 1. They have a ton of studios now which means we will be getting a lot of interesting games. 

 

It has other new games ranging from indie to AAA that come out on release date. So many games come out I'm interested in but would never buy. 

 

I paid roughly 100 quid for 3 years of game pass. That's the price of 2 games. Just this year I would have bought Flight Simulator and Halo so already saving money. 

 

EA is included in the ultimate sub. 

 

Cloud streaming. 

 

Overall for me personally its all about the future xbox exclusives. Frankly if you own an Xbox and don't have gamepass then you are a bit mental. 

 

I had psnow for 6 months and it just seemed nothing of note that was new came out in that period there are still a ton of brilliant games available but I feel I had played everything I wanted to within a couple months. 

 

The only way Sony can rival gamepass is by having all first party games released on psnow on opening release day. And I don't see that ever happening. I bought the PS5 for the 5-10 essential exclusive games that will come in its lifetime, I'm happy to pay for the big exclusives (when they are £50 or less though) and keep gamepass running for the lifetime of that. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

For me it's the constant additions to Gamepass that keep it in your minds eye.   It's also a service on a console that for me is nicer to play on (multi device gamesync). So any thirdparty games just get picked up and played on Xbox (and they tend to appear on there eventually anyway)

 

Playstation for me will always be about picking up the first party titles and that's it.  Not interested in PSNow until they match Gamepass on day one first party stuff and they won't do that while they have the lead in sales.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The constant additions: consider how occasionally there’s a Ps Plus ftp game that breaks out - let’s call it fall guys.

you’ve got a network effect: you’ve all got it.

 

Then apply that network effect to a gaming sub service, and suddenly:

- we have an active Forza thread

- a load of us can all play wreckfest (a game which we’d never all have bought on the off chance) following a whim etc. just as it gets a series x upgrade to 60fps

 

with apologies, but there isn’t a single game released on Ps Now this year that’s benefited from that, or likely to: because Sony will target those titles at PS Plus

Link to post
Share on other sites

What’s the bet in the future you won’t be able to buy (for sake of argument) Halo 9 and it’ll only be available on gamepass.

or new maps and content come out exclusively for gamepass subscribers.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Fry Crayola said:

PS Now, on the other hand, costs about the same for a yearly sub, you have to pay separately for PS+, you don't get a library of PC games,

 

No, but you can play all the games on the PC.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Harrisown said:

What’s the bet in the future you won’t be able to buy (for sake of argument) Halo 9 and it’ll only be available on gamepass.

or new maps and content come out exclusively for gamepass subscribers.

 

It doesn't work that way, a part of the Game Pass service is the ability to buy games with a Game Pass member discount, which requires they be available for sale elsewhere.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The worst thing about PSNow is when you look at the list of games on the Sony website, those starting with "A" are listed like this:

 

SnapShot_210322_141358.thumb.png.fba93ca238ae418bd8e79dcb5862a20d.png

 

 

But for every other letter, they're listed like this:

 

SnapShot_210322_141407.thumb.png.6a80899cb38bb4df1e0861d7776acd62.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, partious said:

The people I know with gamepass seem more inclined to marvel at how many games there are on the service and how great value it is, but not actually play enough of them to make it actual significant value for money for them as a subscription service.

I always find this kind of comment weird but seemingly specific to games. Do you think people who sub to Netflix sit and count-up how many hours they've watched stuff for that month to see if it is still worthwhile?

 

14 hours ago, partious said:

If you have mountains of free time and sit around ploughing through single player games (but only the ones on the subscription service, if you spend 100 hours on Cyberpunk/Breath of the Wild 2, you're still paying the subscription for a month or two of an unused service) then it probably makes a lot of financial sense.

And similarly this is a saying if you sub to Netflix but watch a series on iPlayer or something then you're talking away the 'value' of the sub for that month, which is...bad? 

 

I  guess I just don't think people have those kinds of thought processes by and large in the real world, but perhaps I'm wrong. I tend to believe that people are fine subscribing to these things and appreciate having that choice available for when they do want to watch/play something - and part of that understands that some months will see heavier usage than others and being okay with it. Now if you find over a period of a few months you've not used a service much, then any value-argument would make more sense, but otherwise I think it's a bit odd.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, deKay said:

 

No, but you can play all the games on the PC.

 

There is that, though it's entirely down to the individual as to whether or not "the same catalogue, streamed" is better or worse than "a different catalogue, running natively". Depends what they want to play and what they have to play it on, I suppose.

Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Boozy The Clown said:

 

That generated one of my favourite ResetEra moments. They locked the dedicated thread talking about it and directed people to a completely unrelated thread that had a post mentioning it in passing which quickly fell off the first page. :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

My ultimate dream is for PSNow to become the Spotify of PlayStation gaming. It should have the vast majority of PS1, PS2, PS3, PS4 games available.

 

Streaming for PS3 downwards is acceptable for me - I've played a few PS3 games on it and it's been perfectly fine. It also neatly gets around the nightmare of trying to emulate the exotic PS2 and 3 hardware.

 

For PS4 and up, having the option to download and play locally should be standard.

 

Imagine, on a whim, being able to hop from playing Vagrant Story to Final Fantasy XII, or playing Resident Evil 5, then jumping to Gregory Horror Show. Sounds like heaven.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, MansizeRooster said:

My ultimate dream is for PSNow to become the Spotify of PlayStation gaming. It should have the vast majority of PS1, PS2, PS3, PS4 games available.

 

Streaming for PS3 downwards is acceptable for me - I've played a few PS3 games on it and it's been perfectly fine. It also neatly gets around the nightmare of trying to emulate the exotic PS2 and 3 hardware.

 

For PS4 and up, having the option to download and play locally should be standard.

 

Imagine, on a whim, being able to hop from playing Vagrant Story to Final Fantasy XII, or playing Resident Evil 5, then jumping to Gregory Horror Show. Sounds like heaven.

 

I wonder what the President and CEO of Sony Interactive Entertainment might think about such a thing.

 

oh...

Link to post
Share on other sites

I expect in terms of the general gaming population the most important backwards compatibility is with the previous generation.


Would I love to be able to play my PS3 games on PS5, without a doubt, do the general PS5 population care, probably not and even further back than that even less so I suspect.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 22/03/2021 at 11:01, scoobysi said:


In that case Microsoft will face those same competitors, it will make it harder to attract games to GP on such favourable terms.  I think it will come down to original content, for which MS are currently in catch-up mode with Sony.

 

Indeed, this could be our next sea change moment.

 

Gen 4 was Sega vs Nintendo

Gen 5 was Sony vs Sega vs Nintendo 3rd

Gen 6 was Sony vs Microsoft vs Nintendo a distant 3rd.

 

In 2 generations Sega were gone and Nintendo basically noped out of competing directly.

 

The next generation could well end up as MS vs Amazon vs Google, if the latter 2 really want it to be and they can sell streaming to enough people who think streaming is a good thing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Dudley said:

Gen 4 was Sega vs Nintendo

Gen 5 was Sony vs Sega vs Nintendo 3rd

Gen 6 was Sony vs Microsoft vs Nintendo a distant 3rd.

 

The Xbox didn't sell much more than the GC, and Nintendo had the GBA too.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, scoobysi said:

I think it’s a little quick to write-off Sony just yet and I think Nintendo are doing fine.

 

They're doing very fine but they're not competing with Sony and Microsoft anymore.

 

And of course it's too late but the point is things can change very, very quickly.  In 1994 sony didn't have a console. In 1997 they owned gaming.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.