Playstation Now.....you think it's worth it?

  • 64 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Posted by MirkoS77 (7479 posts) -

Yesterday had my PS4 update to latest firmware. Went onto PS Store to see if Galak-Z had hit yet and found PS Now "Open Beta" tab instead. Under it, around 100 or so games. Prices varied as low as:

  • $1.99 for 4 hour rentals, to as high as $9.99 for 90 days (Alien Rage)
  • $2.99 for 4 hrs, to $14.99 for 90 days (Dues Ex HR)
  • $2.99 for 4 hrs, to $11.99 for 90 days (Virtua Fighter 5 final showdown)
  • $6.99 for 1 week (Darksiders 2)....as opposed to $4.99 for 4 hours.....wtf??
  • $3.99 for 4 hrs (MGS 4), thouuuuuuugh considering the cutscenes would eat into that in no time, dumb investment considering you'll need at least a week at $7.99 to be able to see at least a few hours of true gamplay. ;P

I've tried a few $2 ones so far, and I think there's real potential here. This is a great system to be able to get a quick taste of a game at a moment's notice to see if I enjoy it enough that it warrants a purchase. $2-3 isn't that much to ask for 4 hours of gaming considering movies ask three times+ that much for half, and the convenience is there. 'Course I won't be going anything over that as if I'm paying $19+ I mine as well be buying.

Yea, sure there's Gamefly but then I have to wait for the mail, that doesn't offer me the ability to tailor my what I'm willing to spend for the amount of time I want as PS Now does here, there's queues, potential disk problems, having to go to the P.O. It make have unlimited time to keep the game, but it's more of a hassle in many ways. Not to mention, it doesn't stream to a variety of devices.

While some of the prices seem inconsistent (it's still in beta) but it seems pretty cool so far.

#2 Posted by jg4xchamp (48090 posts) -

Fuck no

#3 Posted by clyde46 (46248 posts) -

I don't think this will dethrone Lovefilm.

#5 Posted by charizard1605 (57650 posts) -

It's batshit stupid.

#6 Posted by BldgIrsh (2579 posts) -

This streams games only from the PS3 right? Probably would make more sense to pick up a ps3 if you don't have one and get the games on the cheap..

#7 Posted by CrownKingArthur (4781 posts) -

seems expensive.

#8 Posted by silversix_ (14565 posts) -

Absolutely not.

#9 Edited by SakusEnvoy (4316 posts) -

In the end, it's no substitute for just owning a PS3 and buying the games for cheap.

#10 Posted by intotheminx (659 posts) -

Those are terrible prices.

#11 Posted by OhSnapitz (18400 posts) -

If $1.99 was for an entire day then I would agree with you... but 4 hours? KMA!

#12 Posted by mgools (905 posts) -

Way too expensive. I don't see this going the way Sony thinks it will.

#13 Posted by GTSaiyanjin2 (5972 posts) -

No not worth it... in general I would avoid any type of game streaming service. I tried out the PS now when it was in beta, and while it was surprisingly good when it came to input lag, nothing is going to beat playing the real game in its native form. So streaming in gaming is a no no for me.

#14 Posted by mems_1224 (47128 posts) -

Fuck no. That thing is a joke in its current state. Just a disgusting way for Sony to keep the milk flowing.

#15 Edited by cainetao11 (17545 posts) -

No, but when games I want to play come out? Sure.

#16 Posted by cainetao11 (17545 posts) -

@MirkoS77: $2-3 isn't that much to ask for 4 hours of gaming considering movies ask three times+ that much for half

I have never paid three times + that much to watch an entire movie as a rental. Also, I have seen the entire product when it comes to renting movies. No. If EA access has no value, this shit is on the negative side of the scale. By suits for Money.

#17 Posted by StrifeDelivery (1558 posts) -

@cainetao11 said:

@MirkoS77: $2-3 isn't that much to ask for 4 hours of gaming considering movies ask three times+ that much for half

I have never paid three times + that much to watch an entire movie as a rental. Also, I have seen the entire product when it comes to renting movies. No. If EA access has no value, this shit is on the negative side of the scale. By suits for Money.

Wonder if he meant going to the theater?

#18 Posted by navyguy21 (12877 posts) -

Renting individual games for those prices is silly, especially when you have Gamefly that gives you one price for unlimited rentals.

It should be a flat fee for unlimited rentals. People would happily pay $20 a month for that.

These current prices are offensive, especially since you can BUY the games for cheaper.

Get a PS3 for cheap on ebay for $70-$100 and you are done.

#19 Posted by jsolidus (165 posts) -

who ever thought about the pricing and rental fees should be fired. i would of supported this if it was like netflicks or gamefly, $10-15 a month to access to all the games from ps1, 2 and 3 but $2 for just to play for 4 hours? I buy all my games for cheap, im talking $20 and under and for the new releases I wait til they hit $40 and under, i find the 90 day prices to be a joke, i could buy the game for that price.

#20 Posted by gamefan67 (9891 posts) -

Hell to the no.

#21 Posted by MirkoS77 (7479 posts) -

Well they're supposed to come out with a flat-fee model at some point, so we'll see, and these prices are subject to change as it's a beta. Personally, I don't think $2-3 is a lot to ask to be able to get a general overview of what a game is like to see if I'd be interested in buying it (being able to be streamed to numerous devices nonetheless), all from the convenience of sitting on my couch and hitting a button to have it right there. I don't agree with the higher prices as I said, but I can see this serving some utility as a quick, impulse rental on the cheap if I'm curious about a game but don't wish to wait for gamefly.

A good way to get a taste for a quick buck.

#22 Posted by SolidTy (43266 posts) -

I've never been a renter type gamer, but some prices are okay.

I was in the early beta when games were free. Everything worked fine on my end, but I am a collector more than anything else.

#23 Edited by Midnightshade29 (5311 posts) -

@MirkoS77 said:

Well they're supposed to come out with a flat-fee model at some point, so we'll see, and these prices are subject to change as it's a beta. Personally, I don't think $2-3 is a lot to ask to be able to get a general overview of what a game is like to see if I'd be interested in buying it (being able to be streamed to numerous devices nonetheless), all from the convenience of sitting on my couch and hitting a button to have it right there. I don't agree with the higher prices as I said, but I can see this serving some utility as a quick, impulse rental on the cheap if I'm curious about a game but don't wish to wait for gamefly.

A good way to get a taste for a quick buck.

I agree... and I have used it for that... I own a ps3 and a ps4 so using psnow for seeing if I want to buy a game is fine. It could potentially save me money from buying a game I won't like.

Now once this is out on the vita.... then it gets it's value as you can't remote play ps3 games like you can ps4 games. I will use it for that. To play on ps4.. nah... but playing fallout 3 on my Vita...count me in.

#24 Edited by OhSnapitz (18400 posts) -

@MirkoS77 said:

$2-3 isn't that much to ask for 4 hours of gaming considering movies ask three times+ that much for half, and the convenience is there.

The problem is... AMC, Cinemark, Regal, ect.. don't require a $400 entry fee to go see those movies. And they certainly don't require a $50 a year subscription to see the movie ON TOP OF your movie ticket costs.

That's a VERY bad comparison.

#25 Posted by scottpsfan14 (5237 posts) -

It's a piece of shit and it needs to die. If this ends up a success, expect PlayStation 5 to be a streaming service.

#26 Posted by lostrib (36927 posts) -

Not heard much positive about it

#27 Posted by MirkoS77 (7479 posts) -

@OhSnapitz said:

@MirkoS77 said:

$2-3 isn't that much to ask for 4 hours of gaming considering movies ask three times+ that much for half, and the convenience is there.

The problem is... AMC, Cinemark, Regal, ect.. don't require a $400 entry fee to go see those movies. And they certainly don't require a $50 a year subscription to see the movie ON TOP OF your movie ticket costs.

That's a VERY bad comparison.

Yea, it is a very bad comparison to drag the initial cost of the system into this when it has no relevance to the comparison at hand. We're solely taking about rental value in comparison to another rental. If we're going to do what you're doing, let's now say $60 dollars to buy a game isn't $60 anymore, it's $460 dollars.

#28 Posted by WallofTruth (1672 posts) -

Wow, what's up with the prices? You get Alien Rage and Deus Ex HR cheaper than that on Steam during sales AND you get to keep the games forever. Laughable prices.

#29 Posted by Couth_ (10119 posts) -

@OhSnapitz said:

@MirkoS77 said:

$2-3 isn't that much to ask for 4 hours of gaming considering movies ask three times+ that much for half, and the convenience is there.

The problem is... AMC, Cinemark, Regal, ect.. don't require a $400 entry fee to go see those movies. And they certainly don't require a $50 a year subscription to see the movie ON TOP OF your movie ticket costs.

That's a VERY bad comparison.

$50 yearly? This has nothing to do with PS+. PS+ is not required. A PS4 isn't required for PSNow either.

To answer OPs question - the week long prices are decent.. The others rest aren't

#30 Edited by MirkoS77 (7479 posts) -

@walloftruth said:

Wow, what's up with the prices? You get Alien Rage and Deus Ex HR cheaper than that on Steam during sales AND you get to keep the games forever. Laughable prices.

What if I don't want the game? My Steam library is full of games I never play that I'd never have bought had I had the chance to rent them for a few bucks (and Steam sales are rarely anywhere near just a few dollars) for most big titles like DE.

#31 Posted by MirkoS77 (7479 posts) -

@GTSaiyanjin2 said:

No not worth it... in general I would avoid any type of game streaming service. I tried out the PS now when it was in beta, and while it was surprisingly good when it came to input lag, nothing is going to beat playing the real game in its native form. So streaming in gaming is a no no for me.

Unfortunately, I'm finding input lag to be far worse than I anticipated. 1-2 seconds on ZOE which is pretty unplayable. I'm OK with the lower prices, but until this is fixed I can't justify spending on this when lag is this bad.

#32 Posted by tymeservesfate (1841 posts) -

@MirkoS77: you sir...r a tool. Playstation Now isnt anything but a cash grab by Sony...for you to try to rationalize the milking is ridiculous and sad to see.

#33 Posted by Snugenz (11888 posts) -

Not at all.

#34 Edited by jsmoke03 (12900 posts) -

ill wait for the subscription before deciding. there is no point renting a game per hour

#35 Edited by bjshepp (10 posts) -

It's not worth it. You're better off buying a used PS3 and using Gamefly, or Gamestop 7 day used game policy and get a full refund. Hell, these games will be worth next to nothing in the next few flash sales.

Unless you like being ripped off by greedy publishers, there's literally no reason to use this service.

#36 Posted by freedomfreak (40550 posts) -

Not a fan, no.

#37 Edited by DEadliNE-Zero0 (2388 posts) -

@MirkoS77: The problem with the subs fee is that it'll probably be extremly high.

What AAA games are there right now? All i've seen so far is Deus EX, Just Cause 2, Darksiders, MGS 4, FF XIII (i think), a few rare others.

Most games are folder. What happens if they want to had Batman Arkham, Bioshock, Borderlands, COD, BF, ME, DA, Farcry, AC, TES, Fallout, GTA, RDR, and so many more?

The sub fee is probably going to be insane.

If it allows us to pick whcih games we want for teh corresponding prices, yeah sure. A full fee access, probably not

#38 Posted by littlestreakier (2918 posts) -

I think it has potential, I personally do not plan to use it. I still have a lot of my old games with their respective system. I'd much rather play a game on it's original hardware (without any emulation) and the original controller it was intended to (although for PS this second part doesn't really matter that much since the controller for the most part has remained the same).

#39 Posted by AutoPilotOn (8490 posts) -

No way. It's total crap paying a few bucks for only a few hours of play? Haha. I am not renting and streamed games. If I could buy then for unlimited use maybe.

#40 Posted by HalcyonScarlet (4409 posts) -

I don't have a PS and I'm not a known fan, however I like the idea of the service and think it could turn into something good.

Both it's streaming abilities and it's pricing model will continue to evolve in time. Right now it's just the birth of the service and any service starts off pretty weak.

I've had Amazon Prime Instant UK since it began as a Lovefilm (Netflix Alternative) service and it's gone from a bit of a shifty service to something good and I have no doubt that PS Now will also become a good service.

I'm standing by Playstation [division] with this one.

#41 Edited by MirkoS77 (7479 posts) -

@tymeservesfate said:

@MirkoS77: you sir...r a tool. Playstation Now isnt anything but a cash grab by Sony...for you to try to rationalize the milking is ridiculous and sad to see.

Why am I a tool?

As I've said more than once now, the higher prices don't interest me, nor does PS Now even interest me predominantly as a rental platform, really. That will be decided when they introduce a flat fee as to whether I'll adopt it as a service ala Netflix. What does interest me now is the ability to try out games for a few bucks a pop to let me see if I'm interested in purchasing them. That's it. And four hours is really enough time for me to make a determination on whether I'll further move onto a purchase.....I don't need a day. With an exception here and there, in 95% of cases I know whether I'm interested in buying a game within the first hour, if not less.

Mostly every time I subscribe to Gamefly, I only end up keeping the games a few days at most, and playing them around the same amount of time. My subscription to that service is always intermittent because I'll get the few games I'm into up front within the first month, then be sitting there continually spending a monthly fee waiting for new titles to arrive, all the while wasting more money that everyone in here proclaims I'm doing so by renting a game for 4 hours for 3 bucks. No, my ability to choose to spend a few dollars individually on titles that I'm into is a better value to me, not only conveniently speaking, but also I'm assured the game will be immediately available and free of defects from other players so I'm not sitting there, paying, waiting for a game for weeks on end while still paying (and playing) something else as a time-waster just to be able to justify the price I'm spending "as a better value" until I can get what I'm really paying for.

But, as I've noted, the bad input lag for now has stopped me from supporting PS Now. Until that is fixed, I don't see this as a viable alternative.

#42 Posted by donalbane (16342 posts) -

No. I support digital distribution, but not of this sort. Gives publishers too much control, and becomes an ongoing money sink instead of a one time up front purchase.

#43 Posted by MirkoS77 (7479 posts) -

@deadline-zero0 said:

@MirkoS77: The problem with the subs fee is that it'll probably be extremly high.

What AAA games are there right now? All i've seen so far is Deus EX, Just Cause 2, Darksiders, MGS 4, FF XIII (i think), a few rare others.

Most games are folder. What happens if they want to had Batman Arkham, Bioshock, Borderlands, COD, BF, ME, DA, Farcry, AC, TES, Fallout, GTA, RDR, and so many more?

The sub fee is probably going to be insane.

If it allows us to pick whcih games we want for teh corresponding prices, yeah sure. A full fee access, probably not

Yea, I suspect the sub fee will be pretty bad as well. Somewhere in the $50+ range to be optimistic. Eh, if the market rejects it Sony will be forced to act and lower prices.

#44 Posted by tdkmillsy (1364 posts) -

Its worth every penny its on a PS4.

Seriously though, $30 for 3 shit PS3 games or 2 good PS3 games for 90 days makes EA now look like awesome value.

#45 Posted by Bishop1310 (1091 posts) -

playstation now is a joke. a rental system is fucked. let us pay 4.99 for an old ass game we can play at anytime we please.

Fuck off sony.

#46 Posted by OhSnapitz (18400 posts) -

@MirkoS77 said:

@OhSnapitz said:

@MirkoS77 said:

$2-3 isn't that much to ask for 4 hours of gaming considering movies ask three times+ that much for half, and the convenience is there.

The problem is... AMC, Cinemark, Regal, ect.. don't require a $400 entry fee to go see those movies. And they certainly don't require a $50 a year subscription to see the movie ON TOP OF your movie ticket costs.

That's a VERY bad comparison.

Yea, it is a very bad comparison to drag the initial cost of the system into this when it has no relevance to the comparison at hand. We're solely taking about rental value in comparison to another rental. If we're going to do what you're doing, let's now say $60 dollars to buy a game isn't $60 anymore, it's $460 dollars.

How the bloody hell does the entry cost have no relevance when you can't play said game without it? Do I need to buy the movie theater in order to see a movie?

It's a bad comparison.

#47 Posted by chikenfriedrice (10413 posts) -

I don't see the value....if MS tried something like this they would get slaughtered by the media and gamers alike.

#48 Posted by ominous_titan (705 posts) -

It would be better if you paid a flat fee of about 25 a month and could access them all. In its current state it's not worth it. It works well enough though which is ok I guess if you want to use it

#49 Edited by AutoPilotOn (8490 posts) -

Lol a movie theater comparison. I could see if they were brand new releases but even then movies are nonstop start to finish. With games you can spend more time in menus or reading or loading. If you want to compare this to anything movie related it's netflix. Now where is the value? 8 hours of gaming cost as much as unlimited movies/tv shows.

#50 Posted by ShepardCommandr (2673 posts) -

@jg4xchamp said:

Fuck no