• 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.

Sony exceeds number of promised PlayStation Plus catalogue games - Eurogamer

Kenneth Haight

Gold Member
I'm stuffed

Too Much Reaction GIF
fat monty python GIF by Head Like an Orange


Played some Tetris effect, Returnal, Miles Morales……then might play a wee bit of ape escape.
 
I had Gamepass for 4 months but never got a Bloodborne experience , there is not a single Game on GP that gives You the drama and gameplay of TLOU, or the lore and action of God of War. Or the gameplay of Returnal.

On Plus Extra or Premium You do not have one day games by the moment but the games You get are enoung to compete GP portafolio.

Honestly people that do not have a PS console and nrever played the iconic IPs from Sony ...this is the time to jump.

Plus Extra and Premium are better than I expected...wey must thank Microsoft for creating GP since this obligate Sony to offer those new services.

Both services are good but personally Sony 's IPs are far better than Microsofts. So Plus is better at this moment.

That's what I have been saying (in my head) for the past couple of weeks now. In my opinion, at the moment, PS Plus Premium is better than Gamepass. And I have had GP for over a year now and Plus/Now for about 3 years.
People keep using the 'day one games argument' but I don't feel like I have really benefited from that yet outside of a few indies, Psychonauts 2 and Forza. I got it in anticipation for all the AAA titles coming.........which seem to be
next year (Disappointed in the Starfield delay). PS Plus Premium currently not only has more content, but in my opinion, better, more current offerings. If someone wanted to get into gaming for the first time and wanted the best experiences RIGHT NOW, PS5 and Plus Premium is the choice. Next year that maybe a different story, but right now..........
Before anyone loses their minds, this is just an my opinion. lol


Also, does anyone have a list of the new counties the service opened up in vs old PSNow?
 
Last edited:
Apparently Hot Wheels is the most popular add for FH, how true that is I don't know.

Correct me if I'm wrong but no FH game has had a expansion at launch so I don't know why you would think FH5 would. As a matter of fact its the biggest most diverse map out of any FH game.

The previous games may not have, but I don't see why the newest release couldn't switch it up and have an expansion like Hot Wheels there from the get-go, as say an additional mode. That's kind of the point of sequels, to expand on what the previous games did.

I'm not saying FH5 doesn't do that as-is, but it'd of been way more obvious to many more casuals, right off the bat, if something like the Hot Wheels expansion were now a default extra mode or feature in the base game and they tried going even further with new DLC content, something even more ambitious than just Hot Wheels again, by the time they got to doing additional DLC for the game.

That's the kind of the thing where I sometimes think: "If GamePass weren't a factor, would they have?" pops up, not just for myself but probably a few other people, too. Because if you've only got retail and digital sales to count on at full price to generate revenue, and you're dealing with a genre that's already got an uphill battle versus others in terms of catching attention, then you'd probably want to add more to the base game including turning previous DLC options into mainline content, that way the game would have better value at the base, and then you can ramp up with even more ambitious DLC when the time comes.
 

dvdvideo

Member
If the game drop in quality and become meaningless because of it. Sure.

Well for sure, all of the latest AAA games from MS have been total garbage, I mean between Psychonauts 2, Forza 5, Halo Infinite, and Flight Simulator, this whole subscription service idea is completely out of line. Clearly it means you can't make an AAA game that is good.
The paltry 87, 87, 90 and 91 metascores embarrass MS. I wish they would just switch to $70 games so that the quality would increase. Maybe we could even convince them to go to $99 games so that the quality would increase even more!
 
Last edited:
Well for sure, all of the latest AAA games from MS have been total garbage, I mean between Psychonauts 2, Forza 5, Halo Infinite, and Flight Simulator, this whole subscription service idea is completely out of line. Clearly it means you can't make an AAA game that is good.
The paltry 87, 87, 90 and 91 metascores embarrass MS. I wish they would just switch to $70 games so that the quality would increase. Maybe we could even convince them to go to $99 games so that the quality would increase even more!

Not really sure what the poster's comment had to do with Microsoft. Jim Ryan has specifically said that THEIR model does not work with day one games and that they would not be able to feed the big budgets that their games require when using a subscription model that includes day one games. Hearing that, naturally one would think that if Sony did decide to do day one, it would result in less than spectacular AAA games.
 
Last edited:

Leyasu

Member
The smallest dogs usually barks the loudest.

In this case, its the distance 3rd last place as usual console fanboys that are mostly envious of the PS fans because they are always winning with the quantity and quality of the 1st party and 3rd party exclusive games on the system. Not to mention that being the market leader in sales which gets the console the most attention in the media and fans.

Also on the flip side, I understand that sometimes the most popular kids like to tease and bully the unpopular kids as well. That's how the world works unfortunately.
This post right here is a prime example of what is wrong with console warring.

God damn
 
Last edited:

dvdvideo

Member
Not really sure what the poster's comment had to do with Microsoft. Jim Ryan has specifically said that THEIR model does not work with day one games and that they would not be able to feed the big budgets that their games require when using a subscription model that includes day one games. Hearing that, naturally one would think that if Sony did decide to do day one, it would result in less than spectacular AAA games.

It had everything to do with the idea that good games are at risk with a subscription model, something that we have seen zero evidence of to date. Sony just uses that as an excuse, not a real reason. If revenue streams are lost on the sales side, they are made up on the subscription side. There is no reason the game budgets would need to change. In fact, in some instances they could easily be higher and lead to more innovation as they know the revenue stream is steady.
 
The smallest dogs usually barks the loudest.

In this case, its the distance 3rd last place as usual console fanboys that are mostly envious of the PS fans because they are always winning with the quantity and quality of the 1st party and 3rd party exclusive games on the system. Not to mention that being the market leader in sales which gets the console the most attention in the media and fans.

Also on the flip side, I understand that sometimes the most popular kids like to tease and bully the unpopular kids as well. That's how the world works unfortunately.

lolol...stop this.
 

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Digital Foundry should compare the Emulation versions on Xbox consoles and PlayStation.

That would be a completely one sided comparison. Sony's emulator is decent but Retroarch/Duckstation would mop the floor with it with PGXP alone.
 
Last edited:

Swift_Star

Member
It had everything to do with the idea that good games are at risk with a subscription model, something that we have seen zero evidence of to date. Sony just uses that as an excuse, not a real reason. If revenue streams are lost on the sales side, they are made up on the subscription side. There is no reason the game budgets would need to change. In fact, in some instances they could easily be higher and lead to more innovation as they know the revenue stream is steady.
Jim Ryan says it’s not compatible with their business model and that it would decrease the quality of their games. There’s no discussion to be had here since MS games are not even in the same league as PS ones. It doesn’t matter what MS and GP do, it doesn’t work for Sony and PS.
 
Last edited:
It had everything to do with the idea that good games are at risk with a subscription model, something that we have seen zero evidence of to date. Sony just uses that as an excuse, not a real reason. If revenue streams are lost on the sales side, they are made up on the subscription side. There is no reason the game budgets would need to change. In fact, in some instances they could easily be higher and lead to more innovation as they know the revenue stream is steady.
So you have access to Sony's balance books and Jim is lying? I mean.....I'm not saying executives don't lie, but I don't see how you would know either.....lol
 

Swift_Star

Member
So you have access to Sony's balance books and Jim is lying? I mean.....I'm not saying executives don't lie, but I don't see how you would know either.....lol
The only reason they keep pushing this narrative is that it would validate what MS is doing and since Sony games are selling 10M+ copies, they’ll probably never do it.
 
Last edited:

On Demand

Banned
I had Gamepass for 4 months but never got a Bloodborne experience , there is not a single Game on GP that gives You the drama and gameplay of TLOU, or the lore and action of God of War. Or the gameplay of Returnal.

On Plus Extra or Premium You do not have one day games by the moment but the games You get are enoung to compete GP portafolio.

Honestly people that do not have a PS console and nrever played the iconic IPs from Sony ...this is the time to jump.

Plus Extra and Premium are better than I expected...wey must thank Microsoft for creating GP since this obligate Sony to offer those new services.

Both services are good but personally Sony 's IPs are far better than Microsofts. So Plus is better at this moment.

Thank MS for what????? Sony had PS plus and PSnow services for over a decade. They’re just now combing them. It’s not new.

I don’t know whether to applaud MS’s marketing for fooling people into believing they’ve created something new and unique, or laugh at people being so uninformed and gullible.
 

TGO

Hype Train conductor. Works harder than it steams.
It's okay, need more Classics but you can buy them, well some of them.
Nice selection of games if you're board or wanna try something you don't want to risk spend money on.
but lets be honest
If it's worth playing you probably have already bought it.
I doubt I'll be keeping it another year.
But I can see the appeal to the Alan Harper Gamers.
 
It had everything to do with the idea that good games are at risk with a subscription model, something that we have seen zero evidence of to date.

That has never really been the intent behind Sony or Take-Two's comments when it comes to putting their massive AAA games in sub services Day 1. It's always been about the finances with them. Warriors and fanboys are the ones who made it about quality.

Sony just uses that as an excuse, not a real reason.

It's a real reason if you look at the financials of what the leading Netflix-style gaming subscription services like GamePass likely bring in, based on market data and some educated guesses.

If revenue streams are lost on the sales side, they are made up on the subscription side.

That honestly depends on the game. Some games have lost a lot of money on the subscription side to where lost sales weren't made up for. However, some games, namely smaller games, have managed to make up for lost or slow/low sales with deals into subscription services.

There is no reason the game budgets would need to change. In fact, in some instances they could easily be higher and lead to more innovation as they know the revenue stream is steady.

The revenue stream from Netflix-style gaming subscription services isn't nearly as high as you seem to think they are. We had a thread months ago using some numbers and percentages from an Axios report, and a few of us were able to work out likely annual revenue figures for GamePass going off that data, combined with data provided by market analysts, Sony, and Nintendo.

I'm not going to go that far into it here (since this isn't a thread about GamePass), but I'm just gonna say it's nowhere as simple as taking the sub count, multiplying that by the monthly price and then multiplying that by the months of the year. Like, nowhere near as simple as that, TBH.
 

Mr Moose

Member
Well for sure, all of the latest AAA games from MS have been total garbage, I mean between Psychonauts 2, Forza 5, Halo Infinite, and Flight Simulator, this whole subscription service idea is completely out of line. Clearly it means you can't make an AAA game that is good.
The paltry 87, 87, 90 and 91 metascores embarrass MS. I wish they would just switch to $70 games so that the quality would increase. Maybe we could even convince them to go to $99 games so that the quality would increase even more!
Psychonauts 2 and Flight Sim are AAA?
 
Ignoring the quality of the emulation their catalog of PS1/PS2/PSP games is an impressive low effort from Sony's part, it doesn't include most of their own games.

To me the bare minimum would be for them to keep their old catalog permanently on the service while changing the third party catalog over time and working on improving the quality of the emulation itself. It's really not a high bar to clear.

It's frustrating that Sony can't never get the details right even if overall there is enough value on the service already.
 
Last edited:

Swift_Star

Member
It's okay, need more Classics but you can buy them, well some of them.
Nice selection of games if you're board or wanna try something you don't want to risk spend money on.
but lets be honest
If it's worth playing you probably have already bought it.
I doubt I'll be keeping it another year.
But I can see the appeal to the Alan Harper Gamers.
Not necessarily. Returnal and Miles Morales are worth playing but I honestly havent felt like paying for them. I could wait for a deeeeeeeeeeeeeep sale but now they’re on the sub.
 
Last edited:

dvdvideo

Member
Jim Ryan says it’s not compatible with their business model and that it would decrease the quality of their games. There’s no discussion to be had here since MS games are not even in the same league as PS ones. It doesn’t matter what MS and GP do, it doesn’t work for Sony and PS.

LOL what an absurd statement. So Demon Souls, Ratchet and clank, and Horizon and GT7 are all "not even in the same league" than similar games with similar scores from both critics and players over the same time period? Ridiculous. You have zero idea if it works for Sony or not. Clearly they are moving towards the idea as opposed to away from it.
Sony has some great developers and some great games, but do say that MS games aren't even in the same league is the biggest BS I have read on here in quite some time.
 

dvdvideo

Member
So you have access to Sony's balance books and Jim is lying? I mean.....I'm not saying executives don't lie, but I don't see how you would know either.....lol

It's correct to say I don't know for sure either. But easily this could be viable model for Sony, you just have to hit critical mass in subs. They may fear the transitionary period.
 

GHG

Member
So, Sony fans love game subs now? Renting games is good?

sloth no GIF


Like all other gaming subscription services, I'm not subscribing unless there's a number of games I want to try before purchasing. Even then I will only subscribe for a single month. If I want a game enough I'll purchase it so that it has a permanent place in my library.

I'll leave glorifying digital rental services to you and your ilk. Nice try though.
 

dvdvideo

Member
That has never really been the intent behind Sony or Take-Two's comments when it comes to putting their massive AAA games in sub services Day 1. It's always been about the finances with them. Warriors and fanboys are the ones who made it about quality.



It's a real reason if you look at the financials of what the leading Netflix-style gaming subscription services like GamePass likely bring in, based on market data and some educated guesses.



That honestly depends on the game. Some games have lost a lot of money on the subscription side to where lost sales weren't made up for. However, some games, namely smaller games, have managed to make up for lost or slow/low sales with deals into subscription services.



The revenue stream from Netflix-style gaming subscription services isn't nearly as high as you seem to think they are. We had a thread months ago using some numbers and percentages from an Axios report, and a few of us were able to work out likely annual revenue figures for GamePass going off that data, combined with data provided by market analysts, Sony, and Nintendo.

I'm not going to go that far into it here (since this isn't a thread about GamePass), but I'm just gonna say it's nowhere as simple as taking the sub count, multiplying that by the monthly price and then multiplying that by the months of the year. Like, nowhere near as simple as that, TBH.

I agree, it's definitely not simple. Sony already made a huge step this month towards it, will see what happens. They might get away with a delay, which is really what they are doing.
 
LOL what an absurd statement. So Demon Souls, Ratchet and clank, and Horizon and GT7 are all "not even in the same league" than similar games with similar scores from both critics and players over the same time period? Ridiculous. You have zero idea if it works for Sony or not. Clearly they are moving towards the idea as opposed to away from it.
Sony has some great developers and some great games, but do say that MS games aren't even in the same league is the biggest BS I have read on here in quite some time.
Salt Bae Art GIF by G1ft3d


These games tower above whatever other games you are not listing
 
Last edited:
I just upgraded to Premium and the game library is pretty darn surprisingly high quality.

A surprising number of PS5 games I was gonna buy, e.g. Demons Souls, but now just come with the sub.

It's a very strong value proposition, imho. And the service doesn't even need Sony's FP games on it day one.

Games like Returnal, I was always on the fence about buying, I can play as part of the sub. That's gotta be great for increasing the visibility of less mainstream games and game genres.
 

Swift_Star

Member
LOL what an absurd statement. So Demon Souls, Ratchet and clank, and Horizon and GT7 are all "not even in the same league" than similar games with similar scores from both critics and players over the same time period? Ridiculous. You have zero idea if it works for Sony or not. Clearly they are moving towards the idea as opposed to away from it.
Sony has some great developers and some great games, but do say that MS games aren't even in the same league is the biggest BS I have read on here in quite some time.
They’re better than MS games, yes. They’re leagues above anything MS released last gen and this gen so far.
No, not at all, I mean MS only purchased Double Fine in June 2019 and the game came out in summer of 2021........
The game was in development way before that.

Anyway, this thread is not about MS. Stop derailing.
 

Cyborg

Member
Why are Miles Morales and AC Valhalla tied to Premium?

I thought only difference between Extra and Premium is that the last has streaming and PS1/2/3 games.

I updated to Extra as I assumed that was the only difference
 

Akuji

Member
Well for sure, all of the latest AAA games from MS have been total garbage, I mean between Psychonauts 2, Forza 5, Halo Infinite, and Flight Simulator, this whole subscription service idea is completely out of line. Clearly it means you can't make an AAA game that is good.
The paltry 87, 87, 90 and 91 metascores embarrass MS. I wish they would just switch to $70 games so that the quality would increase. Maybe we could even convince them to go to $99 games so that the quality would increase even more!
Nice always a good feeling to find people that think alike.

Whenever i need help to Position myself and am unsure about where i want to be, can i ask you?
 

Erebus

Member
Why are Miles Morales and AC Valhalla tied to Premium?

I thought only difference between Extra and Premium is that the last has streaming and PS1/2/3 games.

I updated to Extra as I assumed that was the only difference
What’s funnier, they appear under the “Cloud Gaming” section for me.
 
LOL what an absurd statement. So Demon Souls, Ratchet and clank, and Horizon and GT7 are all "not even in the same league" than similar games with similar scores from both critics and players over the same time period? Ridiculous. You have zero idea if it works for Sony or not. Clearly they are moving towards the idea as opposed to away from it.
Sony has some great developers and some great games, but do say that MS games aren't even in the same league is the biggest BS I have read on here in quite some time.

TBF, just because two similar games get similar scores, doesn't mean the budgets or production values of those games are anything near the same. Production values (or more specifically, the visuals & animations that such budgets tend to fund) are only one factor of many into game scores.

As for the "MS games aren't in the same league" part, I think it's a two-part opinion. One part of that is the fact that MS historically don't have a lot of story-heavy, third-person action-adventure games that feel like the equivalent of a Hollywood blockbuster (or bigger-budget "serious" indie films) in terms of production values or narrative quality. It's a subjective opinion but it's probably fair to say it's a reasonable one to have when MS themselves have had internal reviews on games like TLOU Part II to try understanding why they "hit" as strongly as they do with audiences. One could say, if MS and their teams already had that understanding, they wouldn't need to do those type of internal reviews.

The second part, though, could be more objective, and it's the question of just how many of MS's 1P output can really be called "industry-leading" in some fashion or another, be it in setting new narrative/storytelling standards, animation standards, new graphics/visual milestones, gameplay/game mechanic innovations that inspire a ton of other games to follow suit, etc. And the reason I say this one's more objective is because, in my opinion, very few of MS's games actually reach "that" level. That's not me saying they're bad by any stretch: no one's going to try arguing games like Sea of Thieves or Gears 5 are objectively bad games, they're far away from such.

However, can you honestly say either of those, or most of MS's 1P, are "industry-leading" in one of the aforementioned ways? I don't think you can. The closest to such off the top of my head, in terms of recent releases, are Forza Horizon 5 and Flight Sim. FH5 because for a non-Mario Kart arcade-style racer it's basically got the field to itself when a lot of other IP in that space are either dormant or dead. Flight Sim, because for a simulator it's up there among the most detailed and sophisticated whether talking planes, cars etc. But you can't say the same thing for Halo Infinite, or Psychonauts 2, or Sea of Thieves, and despite how fun they may look, you're not going to be able to say the same for Pentiment or RedFall, etc.

It also shows that for the few games where such can be said for a MS 1P game, they're all staunchly in very logic-driven/"mechanical" genres like racing sims and aircraft simulators. Genres that aren't big into story, fantastical worldbuilding, lore, or human/human-like characters to draw players in. It's very easy to not be a fan of cars or planes, OTOH it's very hard to not be a fan of stories relating to human experiences or featuring human or humanlike characters.

So that's something else to consider when people say these type of things. Some of it can be argued more objectively while others are mainly subjective, but there's a lot that can be taken into consideration when thinking one way or the other.

I agree, it's definitely not simple. Sony already made a huge step this month towards it, will see what happens. They might get away with a delay, which is really what they are doing.

A delay of what? The service? Or adding 1P games Day 1?

FWIW, I do think (well, hope) at least some smaller AA or bigger-scale indie 1P titles can make it Day 1 to PS+ Extra and/or Premium at least. I'm talking revivals of stuff like Tomba! or Parappa/UmJammer. Games that don't really work as AAA, therefore don't need that type of budget, but can still add value to the service while having the option to be purchased digitally off the storefront too.

David Jaffe's talked about the idea in the past; I hope it becomes a reality because while I personally think Sony are right in such a service not being sustainable for their big AAA games Day 1, it could work for smaller releases. After all, they have already been doing that with some 3P games like VF5: Ultimate Showdown and Shadow Warrior 3, and will be doing so again with Stray next month.

I want to see some stuff like that from Sony, with some of the smaller, more niche IP that don't command big budgets but could still do well as smaller digital releases and Day 1 into PS+.
 

dvdvideo

Member
TBF, just because two similar games get similar scores, doesn't mean the budgets or production values of those games are anything near the same. Production values (or more specifically, the visuals & animations that such budgets tend to fund) are only one factor of many into game scores.

As for the "MS games aren't in the same league" part, I think it's a two-part opinion. One part of that is the fact that MS historically don't have a lot of story-heavy, third-person action-adventure games that feel like the equivalent of a Hollywood blockbuster (or bigger-budget "serious" indie films) in terms of production values or narrative quality. It's a subjective opinion but it's probably fair to say it's a reasonable one to have when MS themselves have had internal reviews on games like TLOU Part II to try understanding why they "hit" as strongly as they do with audiences. One could say, if MS and their teams already had that understanding, they wouldn't need to do those type of internal reviews.

The second part, though, could be more objective, and it's the question of just how many of MS's 1P output can really be called "industry-leading" in some fashion or another, be it in setting new narrative/storytelling standards, animation standards, new graphics/visual milestones, gameplay/game mechanic innovations that inspire a ton of other games to follow suit, etc. And the reason I say this one's more objective is because, in my opinion, very few of MS's games actually reach "that" level. That's not me saying they're bad by any stretch: no one's going to try arguing games like Sea of Thieves or Gears 5 are objectively bad games, they're far away from such.

However, can you honestly say either of those, or most of MS's 1P, are "industry-leading" in one of the aforementioned ways? I don't think you can. The closest to such off the top of my head, in terms of recent releases, are Forza Horizon 5 and Flight Sim. FH5 because for a non-Mario Kart arcade-style racer it's basically got the field to itself when a lot of other IP in that space are either dormant or dead. Flight Sim, because for a simulator it's up there among the most detailed and sophisticated whether talking planes, cars etc. But you can't say the same thing for Halo Infinite, or Psychonauts 2, or Sea of Thieves, and despite how fun they may look, you're not going to be able to say the same for Pentiment or RedFall, etc.

It also shows that for the few games where such can be said for a MS 1P game, they're all staunchly in very logic-driven/"mechanical" genres like racing sims and aircraft simulators. Genres that aren't big into story, fantastical worldbuilding, lore, or human/human-like characters to draw players in. It's very easy to not be a fan of cars or planes, OTOH it's very hard to not be a fan of stories relating to human experiences or featuring human or humanlike characters.

So that's something else to consider when people say these type of things. Some of it can be argued more objectively while others are mainly subjective, but there's a lot that can be taken into consideration when thinking one way or the other.



A delay of what? The service? Or adding 1P games Day 1?

FWIW, I do think (well, hope) at least some smaller AA or bigger-scale indie 1P titles can make it Day 1 to PS+ Extra and/or Premium at least. I'm talking revivals of stuff like Tomba! or Parappa/UmJammer. Games that don't really work as AAA, therefore don't need that type of budget, but can still add value to the service while having the option to be purchased digitally off the storefront too.

David Jaffe's talked about the idea in the past; I hope it becomes a reality because while I personally think Sony are right in such a service not being sustainable for their big AAA games Day 1, it could work for smaller releases. After all, they have already been doing that with some 3P games like VF5: Ultimate Showdown and Shadow Warrior 3, and will be doing so again with Stray next month.

I want to see some stuff like that from Sony, with some of the smaller, more niche IP that don't command big budgets but could still do well as smaller digital releases and Day 1 into PS+.

This is a well reasoned response that makes some good points, it actually made me pause and think about the story driven content Sony has provided lately. (and backed up with amazing graphics too)

As far as the delay, I mean a 6 or 12 month delay for games like GT7, Horizon, etc. If those start to hit at a regular interval, it's almost as good as day and date in terms of value for most people.
It might cause a new issue for Sony though, a big group of people who won't buy the game when it launces but waits for the pass, which effectively would mean all of the those customers are on a day 1 pass anyhow. (in terms of financials)
 
Top Bottom