PlayStation Now branded "A Joke" by Michael Pachter

[Foxi4]

There's only two problems with that line of logic.

We'd have to assume that publishers are not already doing this, and they are doing this as we speak. PSPlus games are often relatively recent titles and they're available for free for PSPlus subscribers - I don't see PSNow games being available via a subscription as any less probable.

Moreover, we'd have to assume that PS3 games will continue to be released years into the future, which they won't - the system has maybe 2-3 years of air in it left at best. PSNow, as Guild mentions, is a "virtual console" sort of deal with cloud streaming used as a distribution medium - it's not designed for brand-spanking-new productions anyways.

 

[Arras]

"Playstation Now Branded 'A Joke' by A Joke"

/thread

Takes one to know one.

 

[rakichaneru]

Did no one tell Pachter that PS Now was meant for older games? No one is asking publishers to license their new games for a monthly fee.

 

[CompassNorth]

Every passing day more people take Patcher seriously.
I can't believe there are some of you here that do.

 

[ibis_87]

Plus, he's overestimating renting in the case of games, me thinks. A movie's different: you rent it, you watch it, you're done with it. 2 or 3 hours of, let us say, "passive" participation is needed - you just watch. But when you rent a game, you need to complete it really quickly to make renting profitable. AND, it's an "active" participation: you need to think, you need to react, you need to have enrgy left to try over and over. Not exactly what you can do for 3-4 hours after a hard working day every day. That's my case BTW, it took me almost a month to complete Knack on the PS4. So in my case buying was waay more profitable than renting.