What do you think "Is PlayStation Plus damaging Sony?"

Discussion in 'Playstation - PS4 & Vita' started by BluWarfareHD09, Feb 2, 2014.

  1. BluWarfareHD09

    BluWarfareHD09
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2010
    Messages:
    3,179
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    86
    Ratings:
    +236
    First here is the link to the article- Is PlayStation Plus damaging Sony? – Reader’s Feature | Metro News

    I like the idea of the instant games collection other wise I would have never and I mean never have considered playing Resogun, Contrast or Don't Starve. But I'm hardly going to wait around 6-12 months for a game that I've been following for months or even years to be added to the instant games collection.

    My only concern with it is are the developers/publishers getting the same profit that they would have if it was just on the market and if they are how are Sony managing this and still being able to maintain and upgrade the network like they said they were going to do. This is my one concern as if the developer/publisher is not getting paid as I'm wanting to support RedBarrels with OutLast.

    So what are your opinions on the article and PS Plus. Maybe one of you may know how Sony are able to finance the instant games collection while still being able to maintain and upgrade the PSN network like they said they were going to, hence the mandatory PS+ subscription for online play?
     
  2. Foster

    Foster
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2011
    Messages:
    16,044
    Products Owned:
    2
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    West Yorks
    Ratings:
    +7,250
    First of all its from the Metro so I disregard it instantly when it comes to games, The devs will be getting money from sony more than likely a lump some, If they weren't getting a decent amount of cash I doubt the devs would even go for PS+. If you are willing to wait 6-12 months for a game then go for it but most wont, it is usually after its initial sale window in then goes on PS+.
     
  3. Toasty

    Toasty
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2004
    Messages:
    13,131
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    167
    Location:
    Staffs
    Ratings:
    +4,536
    The article doesn't factor the games that wouldn't be bought or experienced anyway. Games get great exposure on PS+ as does their dlc, which you have to pay for. I've spent money on games I'd never have bought originally.

    What PS+ does is get gamers, casual or otherwise, gaming again and again. Sure, people buying BF4 now could be thinking will this be free in 2015? But people buying now get to play BF4 now, people getting it in 2015 (if) brings a whole new audience to BF4 and any extra purchases it offers at that point in time. And great exposure to the next iteration tempting a new purchase.

    BF3 & AC3 were both on PS+, how are the sales of BF4 & AC4?
     
  4. ozzzy189

    ozzzy189
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2006
    Messages:
    7,779
    Products Owned:
    1
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Location:
    North Lincolnshire
    Ratings:
    +1,241
    Metro provide unbiased reviews and extremely well written articles and you can't dis them for anything written by a reader! I love reading metro (game central), and have followed it on and off since the teletext days.
     
  5. ozzzy189

    ozzzy189
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2006
    Messages:
    7,779
    Products Owned:
    1
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Location:
    North Lincolnshire
    Ratings:
    +1,241
    As for plus, I think it's fantastic and can see both sides of the argument. I'd love to see last light on the ps4, so by playing it on ps3 first I'll either get to see whether it's worth paying for to play it as a better and smoother experience or not.
     
  6. apolloa

    apolloa
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2004
    Messages:
    6,220
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Ratings:
    +1,350
    If PSN Plus was damaging, Son would stop putting games on it, because the devs have to let them do it in the first place! So I would say bogus to any idea it's damaging. I am more then sure the devs make a pretty penny from it.
     
  7. Deleted member 92943

    Deleted member 92943
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    The only issue with Plus is that although subscriptions have rocketed with PS4, Sony are probably not making as much money as they could from it which is why I definately see a £10 rise in the next year
     
  8. zt1903

    zt1903
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2008
    Messages:
    9,543
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Ratings:
    +4,454
    Is it damaging Sony? Not at all.

    As it stands Sony bring in about £10 million/month on plus subscriptions (give or take) and use part of that money to license games for IGC. If you look at the games they license they are generally good games, but ones that have already had the bulk of their sales and might not have a "long tail". Further, many of the games either have DLC or come on to plus when the developer has another title soon to launch. This all adds up to Sony and the publisher, likely to be able to come to a win/win arrangement on pricing e.g. "hey 2K, Borderlands 2 isn't really selling any more and it's dropped to £10-20 at retail, how about £1 million to put it on plus for a month and you might sell some DLC?"
     
  9. kav

    kav
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2007
    Messages:
    25,494
    Products Owned:
    10
    Products Wanted:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    167
    Location:
    Scotland
    Ratings:
    +13,816
    The way I see it, Plus is Sony's feather in their cap over MS. They had to do something really big to bring themselves in line with MS from a service perspective (Live traditionally being considered a better service than PSN, even if some vocal members, cough Det cough cough, disagree), and with Plus they did that. However the contributor raises a valid point, as Sony are currently in uncharted territory here and until Plus has been up and running for a few years, it will be hard to tell the impact it has on people's decision on paying full price for new games.

    Taking Steam as a case in point, I know I am not alone in being quite tight with what I am willing to spend on Steam games. Unless it's something I am hotly anticipating, I rarely purchase new full-price games, because I know within 12-18 months they will have dropped into sub-£10 territory - and in the interim I have an enormous backlog of great games that I picked up cheap but haven't gotten around to playing. Same situation applies to PS Plus, albeit it's a much less mature model to Steam. Sony are reliant on the PS Plus sub to generate revenue to allow them to keep funding the inclusion of great games, and one thing that will not go down well with customers is if the sub should ever need to increase in price to maintain the same standard of "free" games that customers have become accustomed to. Equally, it remains to be seen how dev/publisher's sales projections are impacted, and if initial sales are significantly impacted because of a wholesale "I'll wait for it to come onto PS Plus" perspective from the gaming community, there is a danger the model could backfire. More than likely consideration of inclusion on Plus is going to be something they need to build into their future projections.

    It's an unknown at the moment and while I sincerely hope it's a model that succeeds, as it benefits us as customers in a huge way, I think it's too early to be overconfident about its success without considering some of the ramifications. I think it's a great point that's been raised and worthy of discussion rather than dismissing it.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
    • List
    Last edited: Feb 3, 2014
  10. RedAl

    RedAl
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2006
    Messages:
    12,152
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    Northampton
    Ratings:
    +3,988
    I`ve often wondered what the devs get out of these Instant Games freeby deals with Sony. I`m assuming Sony pay them a lump sum and the dev then hopes they make more dosh via DLC. Which seems fair enough. As it stands I`d say the £30-£40 sub for 12 months has paid for itself with the likes of Resogun, Dont Starve and Outlast coming out this week. Thats before we even see Drive Club plus some other belters this year. If Sony did up the sub by a tenner I`d still think its huge value for money.
     
  11. Toasty

    Toasty
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2004
    Messages:
    13,131
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    167
    Location:
    Staffs
    Ratings:
    +4,536
    Also, PS+ sits nicely between free to play and paid for games, it could be the sweet spot if money is made on all sides and keeping gamers happy in the process.
     
  12. jjgreenwood

    jjgreenwood
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2009
    Messages:
    3,794
    Products Owned:
    1
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    137
    Location:
    The depths of hell
    Ratings:
    +1,035
    I think it does because it stops people spending their £10 a month impulse purchase. Sales on their digital platform are a better way to generate sales and cash my marketing brain tells me. Giving away games for £30 odd a year costs them that £10 a month, perhaps more if the perceived value of the sale taking place would get the consumer to spend more money ala steam.

    I think the money it costs in marketing would be better spent on offers. I also think the average punter on the street doesn't really get it.
     
  13. paul1979

    paul1979
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2005
    Messages:
    8,003
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Location:
    newcastle
    Ratings:
    +1,291
    I thought ps+ had been going a few years 3-4?
     
  14. Deleted member 92943

    Deleted member 92943
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    £10 price rise they could easily be added. Anyone think they could get away charging more like £70 a year if it included something like Playstation Now Unlimited Access?
     
  15. silvercue

    silvercue
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2006
    Messages:
    11,891
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    Fleet
    Ratings:
    +3,670
    PS+ is great and it will have helped some people chose ps4. Only think I can think may not seem great at the moment is that you need it more for PS4 and you don't see as many benefits yet compared tp ps3 due to lack of freebies.
     
  16. DroidSkin

    DroidSkin
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2012
    Messages:
    3,787
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Ratings:
    +3,068
    Having read the article it seems that the author is questioning if Sony will be damaged because there are gamers like him who are reluctant to buy new games because they are worried that they will appear on PS+ for free within the year.

    This model is pretty much the same as you will see with movies. Cinema first, then Blu-ray/DVD, then TV all within a year. Does it stop people going to the cinema? No. Does it stop people buying Blu-rays or DVD's? No. So will PS+ stop people buying new games? I think the amount of gamers that pre-order answers that question. Any AAA title that appears on PS+ is likely at the end of it's useful financial cycle, so a lump sum for a "golden goodbye" on PS+ must be a win-win for Sony and the developers.

    Not knowing the financial deals that Sony has with the games developers that feature on PS+, makes my next point purely speculative. A lot of the games that are on PS+ are from small developers that likely have very limited budgets. If they get a good steady income from Sony, and are able to expand their operation and develop bigger and better games then surely this is also a win-win situation as well? Gamers are quite loyal and if a particular developer is consistently producing games that you enjoy, are you not more likely to buy more of their product.

    PS+ is an absolute steal for the gamer. I think it is a no-brainer for Sony and the games developers too. It is likely that a price rise will occur in the future, but Sony could easily bundle something like music unlimited in to sweeten the deal.
     
  17. Toasty

    Toasty
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2004
    Messages:
    13,131
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    167
    Location:
    Staffs
    Ratings:
    +4,536
    TBH, I thought PS+ was going to £43.99 for PS4 launch, surprised its still £39.99 a year. As highlighted though, PS+ is a bargain if you are into the full ecosystem, eg, you own a PS4, PS3 a Vita. Not so much if you only have a PS4, so PS+ is also encouraging more hardware sales.
     
  18. silvercue

    silvercue
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2006
    Messages:
    11,891
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    Fleet
    Ratings:
    +3,670
    ....got my vita on back order so will get more value out of it.....actually I won't as I don't have time to play anything, but in theory I will!
     
  19. Det

    Det
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2010
    Messages:
    32,660
    Products Owned:
    2
    Products Wanted:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    167
    Location:
    Token American
    Ratings:
    +9,082
    PS+ can do no wrong! ;) That was for you @kav lol

    Why aren't people mentioning better sale prices with PS Plus? Games still generating revenue and gamers feeling like they got it at a bargain!
     
  20. kav

    kav
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2007
    Messages:
    25,494
    Products Owned:
    10
    Products Wanted:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    167
    Location:
    Scotland
    Ratings:
    +13,816
    True, though my understanding is that the uptake increased enormously recently with the release of the PS4 and the requirement to have it to play online.

    @Det...sorry, maybe I'm being thick but I've completely missed what's funny...? :confused:
     
  21. Det

    Det
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2010
    Messages:
    32,660
    Products Owned:
    2
    Products Wanted:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    167
    Location:
    Token American
    Ratings:
    +9,082
    You mentioned me in your earlier post in this thread so I replied with a blind fanboy comment to appease :)
     
  22. kav

    kav
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2007
    Messages:
    25,494
    Products Owned:
    10
    Products Wanted:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    167
    Location:
    Scotland
    Ratings:
    +13,816
    Oh yeah, forgot about that! :laugh:
     
  23. Det

    Det
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2010
    Messages:
    32,660
    Products Owned:
    2
    Products Wanted:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    167
    Location:
    Token American
    Ratings:
    +9,082
    By the by, I've always been of the opinion that both PSN and Live were on pretty equal footing for online games (which is what they are for), but because Live put everything behind a paywall, people were under the assumption that Live was the reason for X game chat and better party design and what not. That wasn't the reason, it was the hardware in the X360 and the same reason PS3 could not do those things on the OS level.

    So I've rated the online pretty much on par for the past however many years. Sure the hack was a pain (which all you XBoxers like to bring up regularly), but I'm sure Target are well aware that it doesn't matter how good your security is, if people want to hack it, they will hack it, it just takes time.

    But back on topic, Plus has been the best thing to happen to gaming since... well gaming imo.

    Devs get more exposure for their games, and traditionally most of the games offered on plus have some form of DLC or a game releasing shortly afterwards so I don't think there are any repurcussions for putting great AAA games on Plus.

    There are many games I've gotten from Plus that I never would have tried otherwise. I've also gotten a good varied opinion on games because of the EU getting various games on Plus we don't get, then I buy into that game because I've heard it was good (and it comes on a sale here versus on Plus outright). So I think it spurs more sales than detracts from them.
     
  24. Toasty

    Toasty
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2004
    Messages:
    13,131
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    167
    Location:
    Staffs
    Ratings:
    +4,536
    Doesn't live offer free games now? If so, MS must see some value in following Sony's lead, or they wouldn't bother.
     
  25. Det

    Det
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2010
    Messages:
    32,660
    Products Owned:
    2
    Products Wanted:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    167
    Location:
    Token American
    Ratings:
    +9,082
    2 5-year old games a month so far... occasionally a 2 year old game thrown in for good measure.
     
  26. kav

    kav
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2007
    Messages:
    25,494
    Products Owned:
    10
    Products Wanted:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    167
    Location:
    Scotland
    Ratings:
    +13,816
    They do, but it's laughable in comparison to what Sony have in place. It's also only on 360 currently, won't be out on the One until April (rumoured).
     

Share This Page

Loading...