Talking Point: Has PlayStation Now's Subscription Service Put You on Cloud Nine?

I'm not sure yet. It's a great concept though.

I'm not really convinced by the concept in the first place and the ridiculous price certainly doesn't help matters. It's probably best to just own my games anyway.

Once Ps2 & Ps1 titles inevitably hit, I can see it taking off, but even then this subscription is a step in the right direction when you consider that 3 months subscription gives you unlimited access to all those games for the price of one game. To be honest though, I'd be more interested if there was an announcement regarding a UK rollout

So let me get this straight.... Technical difficulties with making my PS3 library accesible on the PS4 are gone, but now Sony expects me to be happy I can play the games I already eadh own for as little as $20 a month???
Very nice for newcomers or people who didn't buy much the last time around, but for someone like me with a digital catalog that easily runs into the 1000s of dollars this is a kick in the face. I can't believe the nonsense console gamers have to put up with... Screw this, I'm going Nintendo...at least they make it clear up front you gonna be effed in the a.

Not really sure on it yet woukd to see how it goes in the UK first...

I think I'll try it out when it arrives in the UK this year. Curiosity more than anything really, want to see how well it works, still got my PS3 anyway. But the price seems reasonable, as long as Bungie/Activision don't do the conversion

The beta has been available for a while of course, but I have yet to give it a try mostly because I found the pricing and rental periods weird and wasn't especially impressed with the available lineup of games. I hear Sony will be offering a seven day free trial when the subscription service launches though, a good excuse to finally see how well this works on my network.

This is an amazing service. I've tried it out multiple times. As long as you have a good internet connection it is pretty seamless. You might thingk$19.99 a month is a bit expensive but it is really a great deal. You get unlimited use of the games in the library which will expanded over time. Yes you can get Gamefly for $8.99 a month but you have to send and receive the games through the mail which takes time. If you have ever used Gamefaly they don't send and receive games in a timely manner. With PS Now you can swap and change games at will.

Also, for someone like me, my PS3 died a few months few PS4 launch so I don't have a way to play PS3 games that I have yet to play. This will give me a chance to play those games. Not to mention the older PS2 and PS1 games once they are added.

For those who think this is a scam and all of the PS3 porting issues are magically gone. They are still there. This service just streams the game through a virtual PS3 console over the internet.

I think that $20 per month is highway robbery for what is offered. $10 a month/$5 for PSPlus users? That may be doable.
So, $240.00 a year gets you a slim library of PS3 games that you probably already own or could go buy for $10 each at GameStop and own the physical product. Sign me up!!!

@get2sammyb I'm not really fond of having to rely on a constant internet connection in order to play games. I'm always going to be worrying if my connection is going to drop (regardless of how good my connection is and not to mention PSN's seemingly constant server problems) and that takes the enjoyment out of PlayStation Now. Plus I feel like that you don't own the games at all with PS Now, and I prefer to own my games (I never rent games anymore even though I used to in my kid and pre-teen years).

That may sound hypocritical coming from someone who is addicted to PS Plus, but I feel like you kind of own the games even though you technically don't. You also get so much bang for your buck that it's very appealing. Plus you can also ''buy'' a free game like Resogun for example and not play it until a year later. And for a massive Backloggery slave who games on Nintendo, Microsoft, Sony, and retro consoles and handhelds; it's very useful. I'm essentially obtaining free games even when I'm not gaming on PlayStation platforms.

But with something like PS Now, I feel like I wouldn't use it much even if I liked the concept. I don't care for the trend of games becoming like Netflix. I don't mind streaming services for movies because unless it's a movie I really like, I would likely only watch a movie usually once. And I watched movies that I probably would never watch thanks to Netflix. But when it comes to games, I prefer to own them (retail or digital) and having the option to play said games whenever I want to. So combining that with the internet connection requirement and the honestly ridiculous price makes me as warm to the idea of PS Now as jumping into a lake full of piranhas.

I'm also hoping that streaming services like PS Now isn't the future of gaming or I'll be turning into a completely retro gamer.

ha, like anyone on this site will be happy with what sony does!

I think this is good for people who don't own a PS3 or never had one. For me, who still owns & uses my PS3 daily, not so much. I get my games, in physical form, & mostly used. Plus, I like to build a collection, etc. And the last thing I need is another subscription service since I already have cable, Netflix, & am going to get HBO's service whenever that launches.

At least it's better than the b.s. pricing they had when if first rolled out the service. And people calling this a "scam" are partially correct, but we knew it was comimg. They could have made the PS4 backwards compatible, but chose not to bc of $. And this is where that $ will come from. But backwards compatability is an extinct thing, except on Nintendo's consoles. But unlike on Nintendo's consoles, we get more than 3-4 games a year worth buying, so it's worth it

@Tasuki
I don't necessarily disagree with what you are saying. However, if you're going to charge $20/month in a day when Netflix is $8, Hulu is $8, a YEAR of XBL or PSNPlus is $50, you better come out of the gate with a heavy-hitting argument as to why your service is relevant. That "heavy-hitting argument" is made, in this case, in a large library of compelling games from each PS generation.
As is, there is very little justification shown by this service for charging $240/year. If any.....
(BTW: There's your PS3 and 4 games' price, right there.)

@Knux

You bring up a great point about the internet side of this argument. Especially considering how flighty the PSN can be sometimes. My internet is usually pretty stable (knock on wood), but paying $20 a month to Sony for something that relies solely on an internet connection right after the latest PSN fiasco........would feel risky.

@viciousarcanum
I disagree. This site hosts what I believe are fair discussions of the pros and cons of Sony's consumer treatment. (Well, in the forums, any way. Some writers here are so pro-Sony that they're afraid to type the letters X, B, O, and X in sequence or acknowledge that some games are, gasp, multi-PLATFORM, as doing so might cause their computers to spontaneously combust.....)

The reply on the comments on us blog are somewhat interesting. I am pasting some:

"The PS Now rental catalog already has 200+ games and games are added weekly so yes, you may find some games that will not be in the current subscription offering but can still be rented individually." (What????)

"There are some amazing games for PS1 and PS2 and our longer term vision is to go back further into the PlayStation generational library and offer those with PlayStation Now. Right now however, we are focused on bringing to users experiences from the amazing PS3 library."

"If your membership runs out and you decide to come back later, your saves will be waiting."

I probably never subscribe though. I already have most of the PS3 games I want and my internet is not that fast. Still not available in Europe though and I doubt we will see the service here soon.

20$ per month is way too high! 10$ per month would be far more reasonable. Also, playing games in streaming takes hugeeeeee amounts of bandwith , therefore an already generous ISP offer must be owned and paid for to maintain something reasonable. Netflix alone eats up 150gb of my alloted 300gb per month so, no, I won't pay for a service I would need to pay even more to enjoy!

Folk expecting Netflix style pricing for an endeavour that would seemingly cost more to maintain than Netflix's offering is how I expected the comment section to turn out, and it hasn't disappointed

Nice idea but I'm more physical over digital

@tonyp1987
I hear ya. I take my hobby seriously and have a collection which spans back to the ColecoVision days. While I do buy the occasional game on XBL or PSN, my main gaming is done by the games I physically own and don't have to connect to the internet to play (for the most part).

Meanwhile, any Wii game you own you can play on your Wii U! I love my PS4 but refuse to give into this streaming service until they add more games and lower the price.

@KillTheG1mp I keep forgetting that ISP usage caps are still common in the US. Move to Britain bad weather, but you'll probably be gaming inside anyway with unlimited 120Mbps fibre for £20 a month!

_{Please watch the language -Tasuki-}

@seeafish actually, usage caps are not as common as you think in the US. It depends on the ISP and location. There are a lot of ISPs that do not have a cap. For example my ISP doesn't have a cap.

It's not in the UK yet, so I can't really comment too much, though there are some changes that if like to see to the service before I invested.

I like the idea of streaming in different rooms with one console. But playing PS3 games doesn't interest me that much. If it gave me the option to trial lots of new games, I'd be far more interested, so that that way I could test without buying as such.

I had more ideas...but my mind has gone blank.

@seeafish in Canada we are robbed by mainstream companies. Most are about 50gb per month for about 80$... I get 300gb per month for 60$ with Teksavvy for a cable 20mbs connexion.

Lucky you then for having unlimited access!

Though I quite like the idea of the service itself, I'm not sure I want another gaming subscription to pay and my main concern is Sony's network.

Since moving over from Xbox to PS the one thing that lets Sony down imo is their crappy online infrastructure.

The DDoS attacks took longer to recover than Xbox Live, online gaming is not as solid on PSN, their websites are slow as crap to load, security seems poor and the network seems to be at its limits already with different issues seemingly surfacing every week. Because of this I have little to no faith in them being able to deliver a top quality gaming streaming service at all.

I hope they prove me wrong as the concept is good but if they have DDoS attacks on their PS Now servers that'll be it - you will not be able to play any game, period.

Also I need to be convinced of latency issues and would like to see the service run in a lag-free way before I hand over any cash.

With this and Morpheus, I feel Sony are taking pretty big risks...

@PMasterTy9
Mine sure does. Although it's 300GB. Takes some doing to meet that ceiling....

@IronManDS Well, I wasn't saying none of the ISPs in the US have caps. I was just pointing out that the fact that a lot of the ISPs do not have caps. Unfortunately your ISP has a cap.

@PMasterTy9
I wasn't accusing you of making such a statement. I was just pointing out that, unfortunately, I'm one of the saps who has a cap

Maybe i am an old fashioned Gamer but i really can't get my head around not owning games in the future(if streaming does become the future of gaming) & just streaming them. I HATE the thought of that :-/

• I will be excited about PS PLUS 'when' it has 'every'(i.e never then, knowing how hard it's to get old games on PSN(it seems) i.e LOADS of brilliant PS1 & PS2 games still have't come to PS3's PSN yet) PS1 & PS2 & PS3/PSN Games on it.

The service is the future so it's good they are getting in early. I think the value will really exist once new release games are there. I see both sides of the backwards compatibility slap in the face argument and think both are valid.

I'm spending so much time on PS4 releases, I really don't envision going back to replaying games from my old PS3 catalog. It might be fun revisiting some series games (thinking Uncharted here) before diving into a latest release, but other than that there's no appeal. Not enough ROI (return on investment) for the price.

I skipped most PS3 games so this is something I would actually use. I dont mind not owning those games, I will buy the ones I love anyway.

It would just feel weird for me as I feel what if Sony went bust what happens to my save compared to physical games with saves stored on the console plus it is expensive I can only imagine in horror how this will be in pounds probably £15-18.

Like PS+ wasn't enough for sony. Get out of here with this $20 a month PSnow crap.

I was an onlive beta user for some time and games in the cloud equal lag, said and done. Unless they get some strike up some deal with ISP's and get a perfect ping and bandwidth combo this will never take off.

Then there's people who have perfectly fine PS3 games that become paper weights because of no backwards compatibility.

I'm so disappointed really wanted to support Sony on this since i like the idea but that price yeah... that's a no no

@IronManDS

Good point on the price comparison. I have similar thoughts. While subscription is a much better way to handle PS Now, the price seems out of balance. Not terrible, but like paying $2 for a can of soda, when a full 2 liter of the same brand cost $1.30. The logic doesn't make sense. It should not be more than PS Plus, which gives us free, practically new games weekly.

But add some PS1 and PS2 games and maybe that price becomes reasonable

@Godsire- Well then I guess you're done with gaming come 2027 lol

Great move, the rental fees per game were a huge turnoff.
I hate to sound greedy, though, but I still won't be joining PS Now unless Sony offers a steep discount for PS+ users. I'm already paying $50 a year, $20/month is too high. Bring it down to $10-12 a month for PS+ and then i'd join.
Oh, and PS1 & PS2 titles are a MUST.
PS1 for all that nostalgia & childhood, and PS2 bc, I am ashamed to say, I missed out on a PS2!!!

@PMasterTy9 yeah I guess it's a pretty massive country heh. I recall reading a really long comment thread on Kotaku about caps once. Seemed like a vast chunk of states were pretty much monopolised by a couple ISPs who then charged through the nose for fairly puny limits.
Used to be common in the UK too, but there are SO many ISPs (in a relatively small country) competing that it quickly vanished.

It would be nice if they did something for Plus members with the pricing. $15 per month/$40 every 3 months would be good enough

$20 is pretty much what you'd pay for 1 new game or 2 used games.
To have access to all those games for the same price is such a good deal.

If I were to subscribe and there is an error of any kind their end, what then?
"Here have 5 extra days"?
No thanks, Id rather you just make a stable platform on which to stream, and use the funds I pay for PS Now ONLY for PS Now, and not some crazy VR headset nonesense!

DEFINITLEY GOING TO GIVE THIS A TRY, I NEED TO ADD MORE TROPHIES TO MY COLLECTION I HAVE 9,563 RIGHT NOW =D

There's room for both streaming services and ownership - music and TV / movies have shown us that. Streaming services like Spotify, Netflix etc. sit alongside the likes of digital purchases like iTunes and Google Play, which also sit alongside the ability to purchase physical CDs and DVDs / Blu-rays. As time goes on, I suspect more and more purchasing will go through the streaming / digital purchase route (due to its convenience). I'm not saying everyone will do this before 5 people come along and tell me "over their dead body will I be doing this", it's just where the mass market will go (as has happened in the music industry already, and is starting to happen for films and TV shows).

And, at $20 per month to access hundreds of games in a catalogue, this seems like a very good price to me (suspect that will translate around the £14.99 mark). I don't think this is a service Sony are expecting people to pay for all year round - hence no option for a yearly subscription. If you want to play PS3 games all year round, buy a PS3. But to be honest, if you want to do that, you probably already own one, and this service isn't really intended for you.

I really don't get why people think this is such a rip off - I suspect a lot of these very same people pay double / triple that to pay for a satellite / cable TV service, of which they rarely watch anything outside the free-to-air channels.

Well heck in a way this is good for a person like me. ... because I only buy games I know I'm going to play and keep. .. so me doing trade ins at gamestop doesn't really happen much.... plus I'm that Gannett that sees a game who would want to play a Game beat the story then want it gone .. kinda like saying borrow it from a friend. So yea this is s pretty alternative! But I do agree the price is a bit above what I expected but hell. ..I look at it from both points of view. ... the engineers and the processing power required for this great feat to work properly needs funding! Heck they will potentially have some specials on pricing for periods of time down the line so no biggie! Bring it on Sony! =)