At the end of the month I like to take a look at what the industry is talking about and see where I'm going against the flow. These are opinion that seem to be prevalent in the industry with both fans and insiders, but I just can't seem to get my head around, important questions that are not being asked, or opinions that seem to run counter to what everyone else is saying. This month, I'm going to skip how I disagree with pretty much everything anyone is saying about DOTA and leave that to two articles I plan on posting later this month. As for the rest of the "big news" ...
I don’t understand why we care about “PlayStation Now”
I've already posted a break down of the pricing and will be recapping that and the marketing Sony is doing later this month, but on a much simpler level I don’t understand why any “gamer” cares in the slightest about the service. It’s a streaming service, and as such, requires a constant internet connection to use. If I remember anything from the months that followed E3 2013, it’s that no gamer alive would EVER use a service that required an constant online connection, regardless of the benefits it offered. This became the defining ideology of the PlayStation nation and nothing short of a battle cry; anyone who would put up with an always online requirement to play games was an idiot, and any company that would ask gamers to do that was worse than Hitler. They are hundreds of thousands of comments on 10s of thousands of websites archiving this universal belief … but now being online 24/7 is all honky-dory? What happened to the “what if my internet is down” arguments? With PSNow an outage not only means you can’t play but you lose the money you paid for the timed rental. What happened to the arguments about internet quality? Without fast internet, PSNow is a horrible service, and when we were talking about an online check it sounded like everyone's internet was so slow and unreliable it would be impossible to send a few megabytes every month or so without major headaches. Yes it’s clear that what Microsoft was doing with aggressive DRM was different (and subjectively much more “evil”) then a service with a technical requirement to be online all the time … but the arguments, if valid to one, are valid to both. Unless everyone, including top tier media sites, was just making up objections to make something look worse than it was and feed the console wars to drive up clicks …but that would never happen. In fact, the gaming community should find so little value in this service that I’ll even take it a step further …
I don’t understand why “PlayStation Now” is being offered on PlayStation.
With the exception of Colin, who would respond to Sony forcing you kill you first born child to continue using PlayStation products with an article about how wonderful it was that Sony was doing its part to deal with overcrowding, there is not a lot of positive being said about this service. And that’s sad … because not only is it great, it’s great in the “big f’ing” deal kind of way, and might just be the most significant thing to happen in the gaming industry in years. The next time I tell my non-gamer friends about a game like “The Last Of Us”, that has universal appeal well beyond its strength as a game, they’ll have an option to try it out without having to invest $300 in a new system. With PlayStation Now, they can just steam it to a tablet or Web TV. PlayStation Now isn’t only going to make Sony a lot of money on its own, but it’s a window to show the non-gamer how much gaming has evolved, and how the media can be enjoyed by anyone. It’s going to solidify in the minds of millions the idea that Sony PlayStation is where they should go to become “new gamers”, a strategy that worked out rather well when Nintendo tried it with the Wii. Microsoft has no counter; they tried to do the same thing by making the Xbox One the “living room device” and offering TV functionality and original programing, but failed miserably. PSNow is not only going to be a huge win for Sony, it’s going to beat Microsoft at their own game … or at least it would have. Instead, by releasing on PS3 and PS4 before showing in to the non-gaming world, the perception of an overpriced service that’s WORSE than just buying games is going to be so prominent in media that by the time it gets in the hands of the generally population it will already be a bust.
For 80% of the population, trying the one game a year you’re going to be interested in on PSNow is a much better option than investing in hardware, but Sony asked the other 20% to test it out for them. Not learning the lession they so brutliy taught Microsoft just last year (most non-gamers still think the Xbox One requires an online connection even to this day), Sony is going to be stuck with the label the internet gives PSNow in it's infancy, and it's not looking good. Objectively, a low cost alternative to console ownership for the people who are only going to play a few games a year is a very nice thing, and the internet can’t have nice things. Especially when they are subscription services. On that note …
I think EA’s subscription service is fantastic (even without games)
When EA announced they would be offering a $5 a month or $30 a year service on the Xbox one that would come with $10 off all games and DLC from EA, up to 7 days “early access” to EA video games (without having to pay for them) and a small collection of free games, it was met with cautious optimism. Given the internet’s relationship with EA (voted worth company in the world 2 years in a row) cautious optimism is pretty darn good. The uncertainty everyone seems to come back to is what games will be included and how will they work (will they expire and only be playable for limited periods of time). To that I counter … Who cares? Just doing some simply math, a $30 a year service pays for itself as soon as you buy $300 worth of EA games given the discount. That might seem like a lot, it’s a perfectly reasonable amount to someone who is so into gaming that a few top tier games at $30 a year might not be worth it. More importantly, up to 7 days to try out FULL RETAIL COPIES of new games before they are released with progress carrying over to the game if you buy it has so much value add, it could be the whole service and I would still pick it up day one. Games, like movies, are all about being the first to experience them … and you already know that, internet. When Sony said PS4 owners would get to play the BETA of Destiny a few days early it was the death of Xbox One, and any time a games offered a “limited edition” that came with a day or two of early access for $20 or so, it sells out. This isn't a new thing. We want early access, it’s important and news worth every time it’s offered, and we are willing to pay crazy amounts of money for it in the rare cases it’s offered.
EA needs to re brand this service “EA early access” and call the other two features a bonus. Maybe then we'll be able to see how fantastic it really is (and maybe Sony will let us decide for ourselves if we want it)
Did I miss anything? What did YOU notice this month that everyone else seemed to miss? Let me know in the comments!
No comments:
Post a Comment