All Channels
Popular
190°

PlayStation Now pricing could end the system

Details regarding the PlayStation Now pricing scheme have come to light and unless they're just placeholder prices for the duration of the Beta, it could spell the death of service before it even hits the ground.

GabeSA4351d ago

I also find that digital downloads are pretty much in line with hardcopy games, which i find ridiculous considering there is no packaging, transport or other costs involved really, except to the purchaser having to use their own bandwidth to download. It seems pretty much the same with rentals as it appears here.

mikeslemonade4351d ago

In the past year if you complain enough about it these companies tend to listen.

crxss4351d ago

the pricing model isn't permanent. AND if people bought a PS4 for PS Now, then i've lost faith in humanity.

colonel1794351d ago

@crxss

It's not that people buy a PS4 for PS Now. I for one, I am interested in PS Now on TVs since I tend to buy Sony's TVs. For people that own a Samsung TV or other brand, the only way into the service is a PS3 or PS4.

It's a very nice compliment to have. It's like Netflix. Everything comes with Netflix now, but it's great to have it for those times that you don't want to go to the movies or rent a recent movie. It also has great original series, but that's besides the pint.

bouzebbal4351d ago

i am not happy with the pricing system..
what i want is a netflix kind of subscription that gives me access to the whole library of games... I saw great potential in PS Now but i am a bit disappointed right now.

NewMonday4351d ago (Edited 4351d ago )

@cross
Exactly!
PSNow is not a console you need to buy, no install base needed so no install base lost, it a service they want to build as hedge for future developments.

Right now they just need it to work well, that should be the important thing, prices can be changed anytime but they need to make sure the technical stuff is working well.

DOMination-4351d ago

People keep saying these are "beta prices" but is there actually any evidence that sony will reduce the price come launch? Also will they refund the difference if they DO lower them after the beta to those who paid these extortionate fees?

When people touted this as a netflix for games I was impressed with the potential. Right now without a subscription this service is irrelevant and doa imo

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 4351d ago
colonel1794351d ago

That's a good point. Digital downloads should be cheaper by default, because of the reasons you stated. This could also mean that the price of PS Now could be decided based at least a little bit like that.

I've said it many times, and a lot of people have too. IF PS Now doesn't get a subscription option like Netflix, it will fail. There is no other way around. Prices would have to be very, very low to stay individual for each time period, and that's something it won't benefit Sony.

I think a reasonable price model would be $19.99 monthly or $99.99 yearly. PS+ members get $9.99 monthly or $69.99 yearly (or something tied to their PS+ membership.

Foraoise4351d ago

178 posts about this later... WE GET IT.

GribbleGrunger4351d ago (Edited 4351d ago )

It's a difficult balancing act that I can fully understand but still find annoying: Sony (and 3rd party) need the hardware to sell well so that their audience for games grow. Those same outlets sell games, so undercutting the hard-copy would take revenue away from the retailer and the retailer would be less inclined to want to promote or sell your hardware.

It's a stalemate that needs a solution, but what's the solution? Until a huge chunk of gamers start to buy hardware online, this will 'have' to continue.

I'd also like to point out that it won't be Sony setting these prices, it will be 3rd party publishers.

mmc-0074351d ago

this service will stream OLD games not new ones

showtimefolks4351d ago

GabeSA

you want digital pricing to be lower than the physical stores selling games also want it to reflect those prices. If you are running bestbuy and a game on psn costs $49.99 yet you have to sell it for $59.99, that means many will buy the cheaper version and you will loose out on a lot of potential sales

I don't a lot of you get the fact how much influence places like gamestop,bestbuy,amazon etc, have. Remember when MS announced DRM policies and gamestop had a big campaign to make their consumers aware

gamefly sent out an email letting all their members know that used games won't be playable on xbox one

so i am sure if it was that simple both sony and ms would have done that, but they don't want to burn the bridges till they absolutely have to

shay1594351d ago

The only thing going for digital games is if you have 2 PS4s you only have to buy the game once (if you want to play it simultaneously).
But, I do agree, digital copies usually cost £10 more than physical and it definitely feels like a rip-off.

raymantalk14351d ago

imo Sony should make it a yearly subscription service like ps+ is £40 a year and you get every game play as much as you like i think everyone would pay for it then.

ps the pricing at the moment is only testing the water to see what the market will stand.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 4351d ago
jujubee884351d ago

I have never owned a Playstation console. Just PSP and VITA.

If I could buy a $99 box (Playstation) and play almost all the games (except for some PS2 games) Playstation has ever made for console for that price and the streamed games are cheap. WOOOOOOOOOOO!!! SIGN ME UP!

ziggurcat4351d ago

who approved this garbage? it's already known that the prices aren't even remotely final.

MRMagoo1234351d ago

probably the same ppl that approved the other 20 or so articles saying exactly the same thing. I wonder if cl1983 with delete this articles, he seems to do it for all the xbone articles that are about the same thing. But then again this is about ps4 not xbone so my guess it wont.

lemoncake4351d ago

If people don't complain then testing prices quickly become final prices, then you would complain and it would be too late.

Sony is a big company, they will go for the most profitable pricing system they can get away with. They are not your friends, they don't do this to make you happy, you are nothing but a bag of walking money to be exploited by them regardless of what you might think.

ziggurcat4351d ago

There's no sense in crying over it when it's known that those prices aren't final.

And as it's been pointed out several times - Sony doesn't set the prices, it's the publishers who are responsible for that.

4351d ago Replies(3)
Eejanaika4351d ago

To expensive unfortanately : (

Show all comments (53)
80°

(For Southeast Asia) New Price Changes for PS5, PS5 Pro, and PlayStation Portal remote player

For Southeast Asia, new price changes.

Prices effective starting May 1st, 2026.

Read Full Story >>
blog.playstation.com
27d ago Replies(1)
BeHunted26d ago

Looks like PlayStation took a hit with Marathon and is now quietly adjusting prices worldwide to recover the losses

andy8526d ago

Lets be honest raising prices doesn't do that when no one's buying it. I imagine the profit it greater selling 10 times more at a lower price

Pergele26d ago

Whatever you say buddy, let's all wear the tinfoil hats.

IceKoldKilla26d ago (Edited 26d ago )

LMFAO Your comment alone says a lot more about you than anything else. When has one game not selling 10 million copies made a company raise the prices of their console? Then Xbox would be costing $5000 by now lol. You remind of the crazy drug addicts on the street rambling on about conspiracies. xD You sure you don't need a hug, buddy?

ChunkyMonk26d ago

One game that Sony payed $200 million for. lol
Also, you sure were quick to get triggered. Maybe your the one who needs a hug?

Eonjay26d ago

If nothing else, we should be united against the real issue here. AI and unnecessary tariffs that are effecting all gamers.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 26d ago
Athlon10126d ago (Edited 26d ago )

The price increases are due to the RAM demand associated with AI and the US-Iran war. You can look to any business news website and local news to see that. Heck, even the 2026 Asus Zenbook Duo I've been eyeing has faced delays and has had a price increase of $400; that laptop has two specs. Asus is doing a staggered release with per-orders for the lower spec now and shipping in May and pre-orders for the higher spec that I'm eyeing starting in June. Basically, all computer manufactures are affected. It'll most likely start affecting smart phones too if it hasn't already. I can't remember the last time any major console maker (Nintendo, Sony, Sega, etc) increased the price of their console mid cycle outside of Microsoft just to make more profit.

S2Killinit26d ago

Its not the war. Its the RAM issue.

jznrpg25d ago

War is causing gas prices to rise. Transport of everything requires gas so the prices of those items go up as well. So it does have an impact

Athlon10125d ago (Edited 25d ago )

The blockage of the Straight of Hormuz due to the US-Iran war has affected raw components used in semi-conductor manufacturing such as bromine, aluminum, and helium. Iran had attacked the liquified natural gas (LNG) plant in Qatar which is a large producer (1/3 globally) of helium which is used in semiconductor etching. So it's the both the war and the RAM crises.

badz14926d ago

Oh no...should I get the Pro now before the price increase?

80°

Former Xbox Exec Says Developers Didn't Want a Sony Monopoly

Former Xbox executive Ed Fries comments on the early days of Xbox, the opinion of Japanese game companies, and more.

Read Full Story >>
insider-gaming.com
39d ago Replies(2)
Reaper22_39d ago

I dont think that'll ever happen. But i must say back in the day, they were definitely trying because they were more cash rich than their competitors.

CosmicTurtle39d ago

I think MS were and still are the richer company. They tried to acquire Sega back in the day (and considered doing so again more recently), they obviously bought exclusivity to Halo which was originally shown as a Mac title. I don’t think as a company MS can claim the moral high ground here. It’s a wilful lack of self awareness.

Of course Sony would try exactly the same if they had the resources, but when the PS2 dominated the industry was in a much healthier place with an abundance of great third parties.

This has been a depressing generation as far as first party decisions are concerned. The fact we are debating business plans rather than which game is better is a sad reflection of the state of things.

Darkseeker39d ago (Edited 39d ago )

There was Nintendo as well, Sony wouldn't have had a monopoly. In fact, the world would be better today if Xbox never existed in the first place. They pretty much brought all bad practices we have today. We might have gotten all of it either way, but not this early. In term of franchises, I don't think there is anything Microsoft released that would actually be missed if it didn't exist. Even Halo the world wouldn't notice if Halo didn't exist.

S2Killinit39d ago

MS was definitely a bad influence on gaming.

raWfodog39d ago

I think almost everyone will agree that a monopoly is not good for the industry. But that being said, the competition needs to be smart and strategic with their business. Simply buying up publishers and traditional third-party studios just to keep them out of the other companies reach is not a sustainable practice. That goes for all parties so don't think I'm just referring to Xbox.

I'm no business guru by any stretch of the imagination but I firmly believe that the best way to drive consumers to your software and hardware is to invest smart in your first-party studios. Give them full support and guidance in making unique, fun games that are only available to play in your ecosystem and the gamers will come.

Reaper22_39d ago (Edited 39d ago )

But first party studios aren't enough. They only make up a small portion of the industry. Without 3rd party there would be no industry for Microsoft or sony.Developing games take time and money and sometimes you gotta make moves to stay competitive.

raWfodog39d ago

Nah, I never said first-party was enough. I said it’s the ‘best way’ to drive gamers to your platform. 3rd-party is a free-for-all and there’s no guarantee that gamers will use your hardware to play the game. If you want to push your own software and/or hardware you need first-party, or at least exclusive deals with third-party studios.

SimpleDad39d ago

They Shure did a great job... 25 years later Xbox is dead.

Reaper22_39d ago

Then why be so emotional and continue to talk about it. Xbox will never die be ause it stays in so many people's head.

lodossrage39d ago

How can you even see him being "emotional" in that comment?

If anything, you're the emotional one, constantly trying to go at anyone that says anything against Microsoft. So when you call him emotional, it comes off as deflection

Elda39d ago

I own an XBSX & I can say it's becoming irrelevant out of the 3 current consoles.

39d ago Replies(2)
Show all comments (34)
40°

Sony Shows Off 20 Minutes of Crimson Desert on a Base PS5

Sony uploaded gameplay footage of Crimson Desert on a base PS5 running in what appears to be Quality Mode at a stable 30fps at 4K.

Read Full Story >>
powerupgaming.co.uk
BlazedKong65d ago

looks god awful on the base systems