The goal posts will move to whatever is convenient. If that's not obvious to everyone by now then I don't know what else to say. People should stop taking it seriously. It's not a serious debate.
I think that's up to interpretation, if you're talking about if sub services negatively impact the production quality of big AAA games WRT them being Day 1 in such a service. I'm of the opinion that they do; unfortunately the examples for that are mainly on the side of GamePass and I don't know how much of that is incidental vs. how much is the result of the type of model GamePass enforces.
For example, would Halo Infinite have released as it did, at the time it did, if it weren't made for GamePass inclusion on Day 1? The same can arguably be said of Forza Horizon 5; would we be getting more than just another Hot Wheels expansion if the game wasn't in GamePass? Would that expansion perhaps had been there at launch instead, and would we have a different, new type of expansion content that hasn't been in the Forza Horizon series before?
These are all just hypotheticals, but I think they're very important questions to ask and keep in mind. If Sony takes a similar approach with their major AAA games Day 1 into PS+, and there is a similar "piecemeal, drip-feed" approach to content or drop in content quality that would not have been the case if sticking to the model that already works, then these same questions are going to be asked.
Everyone keeps bringing up PSNow was before Game Pass, that's irrelevant. Nobody gave a shit about PSNow. It was extremely unsuccessful. Even though it was first it had only 10% the number of subscribers of Game Pass.
For years now we've had Game Pass threads downplayed, trolled and derailed. We've had to hear how Sony fans have no interest and would never subscribe to a sub like Game Pass and how they would rather own their games than rent them. Now that Sony has revamped it's subs to be somewhat more like Game Pass, all of a sudden subs and renting games is great.
There is some hypocrisy with at least a few people when it comes to this, I agree. If you were fundamentally against the idea sub services with GamePass, then that should still hold true with the new PS+. However, there is a lot of nuance to this, and I would hope the people who took such a strong line against GamePass for reasons as simple as owning vs. renting games, at the very least have reconsidered their views on GamePass to be more fair & honest in light of accepting PS+ with open arms, when you're mainly also "renting" games off of that service as well.
There are definitely some aspects of these sub services still worth having reservations over, but for me personally those are tied to how they impact the big-budgeted AAA gaming model, what types of DRM schemes are enforced (and what impact they have on accessibility when network reliability is down), policies related to price increases (or honoring subscribers with discounts/offers due to network shortages), and in what ways these types of subscription services fuel industry consolidation/acquisitions. I feel like those are points of interest one should have for a service be it Microsoft's, Sony's, or Nintendo's, though. At least that way, the concern is fair and spread out evenly.