PS+ charging people whose subscription bought at discount more to upgrade (stacked too)

Take it for what it is worth, as the source is reddit

OOFFF. Sony never lets go of the cows milk TITS. Its their cash, do you really think sony will let their cash go? They aren't MS who allow these loop holes to pass.

waiting for the "We are willing to pay for quality" post by one of them 😁

Holy epic fail Sony, WTF???? 😂 For the payers!

If this is true then, damn is that ever a lame thing for Sony to do. Definitely not a good look there. 🤦‍♂️

Why would they respect a prior discount when upgrading?

They're charging you the new price and, not the difference. That seems obvious.

---

The stacking part is odd. Do they not know what you've stacked? It sure sounds like.

To be pro-consumer.

Ask yourself a simple question; why the f*ck would you go with anything but essential? Its literally just throwing your cash away for a shitty service. You support shit, you will get more shitty services.

Essential for me.

So a person buys the existing playstation service for a year .. finds it for a good deal of $20 off and they should be penalized for that?

I don't know the actual prices so I will use hypothetical ones.. lets say the base price for PSN is $60/yr and the PS+ is 100/yr meaning there is a $40 difference in price to upgrade.

If USER A buys PSN for $60 he just has to pay $40 for an upgrade.

Now if USER B found PSN for $40 he has to pay $60 to upgrade.

That is so wrong. IMO it should not matter what you paid for PSN.. the upgrade price should be $40 regardless.

yikes. cmon sony. don't be a jerk.

If you have paid £36 for a years service like I did then you can use that service for £36 until it runs out. If you want to change the contract then you have to pay the new fee. Nothing shady just fair business practice.

There are too many freeloaders in gaming today who don't want to pay for anything. Cheapskate scumbags the lot of them

Interesting. From the Sony site:

*How can I upgrade my PlayStation Plus membership to PlayStation Plus Extra or PlayStation Plus Premium?*

When the new PlayStation Plus membership plans launch, you will be able to upgrade to a plan with more features and benefits. When you upgrade you will be charged a pro-rated fee to level up the remaining time on your existing membership to the desired level. For example, if you purchased a 12-month membership five months ago and have seven months left, you will need to pay a pro-rated upgrade fee to upgrade your remaining seven months to the desired plan level. Then on your next payment date, you will be charged for the standard price of the membership plan level that you upgraded to at your current payment frequency.

The way Sony handles the upgrade is one thing but this is pretty straightforward. I do give those gamers the benefit of the doubt that they didn't read the new tiers FAQ.

@regnaston:

@jcafcwbb: No doubt! Everyone wants topnotch quality, but no one is willing to pay for it anymore. It's weird that people who spend millions of dollars, and years of there lives creating something, don't want to give it away for free.

Then the BooHoo Brigade gets all indignant when they get caught with their hands in the cookie jar. If Sony's actions are so (such an overused term) ANTI-CONSUMER, then stop giving them money! That seems to be their goal with every other step of the process; why stop here?

I cant even with these subscription wars...

@regnaston: "If USER A buys PSN for $60 he just has to pay $40 for an upgrade.BNow if USER B found PSN for $40 he has to pay $60 to upgrade."

Good lord. I meanPS+ always goes on sale during the holidays (Black Friday)

So how's it work? Are they making people pay more for their lowest Essential tier? So if people had stacked PS+ subscriptions they don't just convert to Essential free? Or is it more they were supposed to convert a set stack of PS+ and/or PS Now for limited stacked duration toward Extra or Premium tiers, then require players to pay difference on the remaining subscription equivalent stacks? Well, either way, total mess on Sony's end.

What they really needed to do was put themselves in position to claim this pivot was Sony's answer to Game Pass and get their subs up. Game Pass Ultimate allowed users to convert their existing stacked subscriptions to the Ultimate in an extremely beneficial manner. It would have been in Sony's interest to say do something similar, give users a conversion from PS+/Now to the Extra/Premium tiers gratis, give users time to appreciate its value, give Sony a chance to say "we're stomping on Game Pass subs that's why we're number one"... no, instead, they look like Sony's corporate muse looks like the future ghosts of Ubisoft, Square Enix, and EA had a spirit baby, came back in time to grief mankind.

They're only doing what their fan base loves most, just sayin. lol :P

People think the “casuals” are ruining gaming. Fact is, it’s the “hardcore” mooches. If the “hardcore” would actually spend money, they would be better represented. Just playing a game isn’t supporting the devs. Money is how the games are made… Not “unique users“ and “total hours played.” But they will find this out the hard way.

PlayStation is showing you just how unwilling to give away money they are. It’s not an “anti-consumer” practice. Its an anti freeloader practice

omg people are acting like this is 100 percent true.

You cow knobjockeys are so fucking thick it's embarrassing. Take your tongue out of Sony's ass you clown.

^^^^

:P

Paying for an upgrade from a defunct service instead of migrating users sounds rather dim.

Money is made when it's money+unique users+total hours played though. As for the PS, they are for the "payers".

If I spend $60 playing a game, that total amount of money doesn't change regardless of how many hours I played it. Same with the f2p model. A person CAN play those games without spending a dime... Or Game Pass, where I can spend $120 a year and play $1,000's worth of dollars games... People are able to play more games while paying less money. Without something like ad revenue bridging the gap (coming soon) there is less money being spent and made. As of right now though, consumers are still buying more games than ever before. The subscription model is another option, but it hasn't taken the place of the other conventional methods. Which means one of the companies is leaving money on the table, while spending wild amounts of cash on exclusive content that hasn't released yet... Going all in is the way to go. But we've seen NOTHING to lead the industry down the path of the subscription services. Which is why PlayStation is going in the way they are. And why Nintendo has all but ignored it. The companies making the most money are the most reluctant. Meaning there's bean counters telling them the math doesn't add up

Unique users and total hours played are metrics for the f2p model. Keeping gamers engaged maximizes the likelihood of them spending money. And the ad revenue model shines in this case as well. The mobile industry has perfected this. The music industry has as well. Is this where we want console games to go? Just so we can save a few bucks? The Xbox damage conTrolls and apologist are unknowingly cheering for the downfall of the hobby they fell in love with... And for what? A "W" in subscription services wars?

You get what you pay for. That saying will ALWAYS be true. Remember that...

@goldenelementxl: Who is leaving money the table?🤔

Your comment here:

"People are able to play more games while paying less money. Without something like ad revenue bridging the gap (coming soon) there is less money being spent and made."

Is not accurate. People are actually now playing more games AND are buying more games they never would have bought before. Some buy games they never would have thought to play before and buy them before they leave the service. Developers have already confirmed this. In addition, sales are RISING due to word of mouth. Gamers are finding games on Game Pass, buying games they never thought to play before AND telling others about those games which are INCREASING the game sales and game awareness. Word of mouth is a MASSIVE sales factor, not in just gaming, but in every product worldwide.

The problem some people have is they are too focused on a single $60 game price tag or someone just playing what is included with a subscription and doing nothing else. But what MS has found is what I stated above as well as they spending MORE money on microtransactions as well as 3rd party DLC.

The great thing about the Game Pass subscription model is that people ARE buying games in the subscription model. A most recent example is Sniper Elite 5. People will be buying that game: before it leaves Game Pass or before the gamer lets his Game Pass expire. Not only that, it's at a 20% discount from retail price. Now the developer received money from MS for the Game Pass sub, but they also received a game sale. Double dipping on the consumer no less.

PlayStation "is" moving towards this model and it's clear. They said they had no desire for PC, and now they are going balls in on PC. They didn't want a subscription model, and now they are going balls in on the subscription model. They said they didn't think rumble was a thing anymore. They said they wouldn't do cross play with Xbox. They said they didn't care aobut BC. They ALWAY seem to change their mind on their future plans. They will (quote me) release games day and date on PS+ Premium at some point. They have already started to bundle newer games into the service. They want to have their games on PC, and they want them on PC now, sooner than later.

PS and Xbox fans will do damage control forever. Which I will never understand. They are the ones that miss out on gaming while they sit there in their pretend plastic wars. While MS, Sony, Google and Amazon will make business moves to keep pushing their revenues and profits up to be multi-trillion dollar companies, not giving a flying **** if some random forum member doesn't like their revenue model.

I love it when developers shit all over the console warriors who sit at a desk and are in full on keyboard warrior mode:

I would need an example of a dev whos entire development cost was covered by a Game Pass deal. Because every example we have concrete information on, states otherwise. A fraction, like 1/3 has been revealed by a indie dev that is no longer developing on Xbox because they didn't make any money there...

Mike Rose is a Publisher for No More Robots. A studio with like a dozen employees. We've been over this a million times at this point. Pubs/Devs like this are the ones that stand to gain from Game Pass. Teams like this operate on a $12 Million a year revenue stream... That's pennies in the grand scheme of things, but EXACTLY the type of studio that stand to benefit from upfront deals that reduce the risk of business.

And don't believe the skepticism still, this article spells it all out. Like 4% of all gaming revenue was from subscription services.

“When Spotify took off it destroyed the music business, it literally cut the annual revenue of the music business in half,” the former Microsoft exec claimed. “It’s made it so people just don’t buy songs anymore.

“People don’t buy songs on iPhone for example, because why would you? They’re all on your subscription service app. Apple’s said they’re going to take away buying songs because no one’s buying them any more.

“So we have to be careful we don’t create the same system in the game business. These markets are more fragile than people realise. I saw the games industry destroy itself in the early 80s. I saw the educational software business destroy itself in the mid-90s… they literally destroyed a multi-billion dollar market in a few years.

This is what Xbox is chasing...

Whatever says in the FAQ print means it must be true. If that wasn't the case, Sony can get sued for this.

1. You can't buy songs on Spotify. You can buy games on Game Pass, not to mention at a 20% discount.

2. Spotify is free. Game Pass is a premium

Mike Rose is a single publisher of many. He knows "dozens" of devs personally who have had his same experience with Game Pass. So we have DOZENS of devs who have had success with the Game Pass model in just this single example alone. Even AAA developers, including Dirt 5 developers, have praised Game Pass. Forza Horizon 5 had record sales on top of record Game Pass unique users.

Most, 90%, of the developers have found the Game Pass have been beneficial for them financially and make money there. In fact, there have been developers who's game has expired on Game Pass and they brought it back to Game Pass due to the overwhelming revenue it has brought in for them.

Microsoft has already provided us with the statistics on how this has been beneficial to developers, showing their increased sales, increased revenue and increase users.

Xbox is indeed chasing retail game sales, Game Pass subscriptions and making the ecosystem beneficial for themselves, gamers and devs/publishers.

The article addresses that. It's because the vast majority of music is on Spotify. That's not the case with games and Game Pass. And the ad/sub revenue dwarfs the Game Pass revenue to a point that it makes it look meaningless.

No its not. It generates billions in revenue through ads and premium subs. Over 400 million active users. 182 million premium subs. Spotify makes almost $200 million from ad revenue from Podcasts alone. Its due to hit the $400 million mark overall in the coming years. That many subs and active users paid out $7 Billion to the music industry. How much did Xbox just spend on studios?!?! And they gotta share their little 25 million GP subs money with other developers and publishers...


Spotify is the biggest streaming platform on the planet. And it wasn't until recently that artists started matching the money they made through just CD's alone.

"The IFPI report notes that in 2020, publishers, songwriters and their Collective Management Organizations (CMOs – the orgs that collect publishing revenue around the world), earned $3.5 billion from streaming alone. In 2001, it was under $3 billion."

Do you see how BIG the service needs to become for it to make financial sense?

Lets see the sources, articles, examples etc...

Spotify is free. I don't pay a dime for it. Nor do the vast majority of Spotify users. Game Pass is growing, is not ad sponsored and cost $10-$15 a month after your promo expires. Spotify debuted 10 years before Game Pass did, and Spotify appeals to a much larger audience than gaming. Just like TV/Movie on Netflix. Microsoft has already said the service is very sustainable as is, even though it's currently a small profit.

As for sources and examples, they were posted here 3 months ago. And 3 months before that. And 3 months before that. Just go look in our old discussions here. They were posted there numerous times. And I already posted a dev that has had their entire development cost paid for by MS (in this very thread a few posts back), as well as "dozens" of others. If you don't believe those devs, and if you don't believe Microsoft, that in the end is your problem. I think you forgot that MS doesn't pay for the full development cost for EVERY game. They said there are different scenarios for different games. MS doesn't give out that information. Just like Sony doesn't give out PS Now details for 3rd party games coming to their service and how they are reimbursed.

In 3 months we will discuss the same thing again.

What I don't get is, why does it upset you that developers praise Game Pass, gamers praise Game Pass and Microsoft praises Game Pass, and that Game Pass is successful? The fact that MS wants to give gamers the choice of buying games retail or subscribing to games is a good thing. Not only that, but MS encourages people to buy games on game pass.

I think Sony sees the success in Game Pass (which is why PS Now is being phased out and they are going to hide the numbers), as Game Pass walked right by PS Now with over 6 times as many users in half the time.

With any luck, Sony will breakdown the PS Now subs in their PS+ service so we can compare Game Pass with PS Now.

Xbox suckers hope! But, oh well :

If true, that's a disgrace from sony. When times are tough and everything is going up rapidly.

It doesn't upset me. Because its not true. Not the developers part anyway. Some Indie devs praised the exposure, while others have stopped developing for Xbox, and another claims to have never made any money from their game that debuted on the service.

Of course Xbox and Xbox gamers praise Xbox. Xbox and Xbox gamers praised Kinect, Kinect 2.0, HDMI in, the IR blaster, Crackdown 3, etc etc etc. You can keep all that praise...

I like how we were discussing Spotify, and you ignore basically everything.

182 million premium Spotify members.

"Spotify debuted 10 years before Game Pass" And Spotify just recently matched the revenue of the old, CD driven music industry model... All it took was 400 million active users (and the ad revenue they brought) and 182 million paid subscribers... And music is FAR cheaper to produce and FAR cheaper for the consumers to purchase/consume... And we get less music from major artists now than we ever have. Major acts have resorted to crowdfunding projects just to get them produced, because no major will do it. But you and other folks will claim Game Pass won't have a negative impact on the product. We've seen the exact opposite impact in every other medium. But gaming will be different, right?

So given this very obvious information, how can you come to the conclusion that you are? You have more industry folks that are skeptical or flat out critical of Game Pass than are "praising" it. I wonder why you disregard one group, while misrepresenting the other... Wait, no I don't...

Sustainable and profitable are two different things. Again, more misrepresentation.

It isn't, i mean, it was. Sony fixed it.

They fixed it already. Seems like it was a configuration error. Now, back to Xbox having no games this year

It does upset you though. It's clear. But it's not a big deal. And yes, it is true. Indie developers and AAA developers (as well as publishers) have praised Game Pass. The vast majority. Not only that, they have made big money on Game Pass with their games.

So you just confirmed that I was right. The majority of Spotify users are free. Spotify is free, Spotify appeals to a drastically larger audience, and you can't buy music on Spotify.

And we have only seen one example of a dev who said they are not developing for Xbox and Game Pass, but said in the end it comes down to time and resources. The vast majority of developers have praised Game Pass, and those developers quotes have been linked here numerous times.

As for Game Pass success, we have to go by what MS said. While it's currently small profit, it's very sustainable as it is. Actually, let me do the exact quote:

"I know there are a lot of people that like to write, 'We're burning cash right now for some future pot of gold at the end.' No. Game Pass is very, very sustainable right now as it sits and continues to grow."

So not only is it confirmed to NOT be a loss leader, is VERY VERY sustainable. And also confirmed it's profitable, but the profit it small in another article.

Game developers are happy and making money, indie and AA. MS is happy. Gamers are happy (well besides PS gamers).

So what is confusing to me is you are taking a miniscule percentage of developers that haven't been successful under Game Pass compared to the vast majority being successful under Game Pass. I mean, I know why you are associating the findings the way you are with spin and misinformation, but it's not valuable to anyone.

@x_hedon: So you once again misrepresent that Phil quote, and the ad revenue model (and 182 million paid subs) and economics around Spotify’s business model. Got it

I don't feel like dancing around your spin. We will have to agree to disagree, again. Until 3 months from now.

Pretty cool stat from Sarah Bond:

"60% of the players who tried Human Fall Flat on Game Pass had never played a puzzle game before, and 40% of those people went on to buy a different puzzle game that wasn’t on Game Pass."

Pretty sick I must say. Developers not on Game Pass are making money from their games that are not on Game Pass because of a random game on Game Pass.

I’m not spinning. I brought links, stories and facts. You added words like, “very very“ “success” and “profitable” to a Phil Spencer quote that contains none of those words.

Actual interview:

https://www.axios.com/2021/11/15/xbox-chief-phil-spencer-interview-20-years

“I know there's a lot of people that like to write [that] we're burning cash right now for some future pot of gold at the end,” Spencer said. “No. Game Pass is very, very sustainable right now as it sits. And it continues to grow.”

But you are spinning because I brought links, sources and facts to back up my words. So again, we will agree to disagree. Because we won't agree. Let's talk about this in 3 months again 😎

@x_hedon: What about “profitable” and “successful?”

You got me on “very,very”. I’d much rather have the other two if I were you (and Phil)

I don't are about any of the three. It has no affect on me. I only buy games. No rent. No subscribe. No waiting for sales. I just click buy and rock and roll. I am OLD SCHOOL my friend!

Gamepass discussion in a PS Plus thread?🤔 I am concerned. 😎

You should be. This is all very concerning.

@goldenelementxl: I am leaving the fake concern and the fake unbias input to you. You excel at pretending.😎