Video Gamer is reader-supported. When you buy through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Prices subject to change. Learn more
A Netflix subscription costs me £5.99 ($7.99) a month and will increase to £6.99 ($8.99) in 2016. For this I get access to more TV shows and movies than I possibly have time to watch. When Sony announced PlayStation Now, its game streaming service similar to Netflix, it seemed like the ideal way to market the technology to consumers. This has now become reality, in the USA at least, with over 100 PS3 games being available to stream for PS4 owners who hand over $19.99 per month (or $15 a month if you buy in three-month chunks). At twice the cost of Netflix, though, and with a limited launch line-up, is Sony sabotaging its potential industry game-changer?
The decision to limit the service to PS4 is baffling considering its bigger user base lies elsewhere across the PS3, Vita and Vita TV. I don’t think I’m alone in thinking I’d make more use of the service via a Vita, and don’t understand why the handheld is having to wait to be compatible with the service.
Launching with only PS3 titles also seems strange. Sony claims that many PS4 owners have never owned a PS3, so PS Now gives them access to the games they may have missed out on. That’s fair enough, but the list of 100 or so titles doesn’t actually include that many (less than a quarter) only available on Sony’s previous home console. Personally I’d be a lot more interested if the line-up consisted of a selection of classic PSOne and PS2 titles – the kind of games I’d be tempted to revisit and not worry about image quality (let alone input lag) issues.
These games are surely coming down the line, but being able to instantly play the Crash Bandicoot trilogy or the original Resident Evil trilogy would have added an element of nostalgia and class to the line-up. Despite their age these games would have been welcomed a hell of a lot more than some of the initial releases.
Which brings us to the price. At a minimum of $15 per month the price moves slightly outside of the “hell, why not?” zone that Netflix sits in. In the UK I’d guess it’ll end up costing around £12 per month (double my Netflix sub) if you buy in three-month packs. It might not seem like much of a difference, but mentally it’s quite a large gap, especially as I’m already paying £40 a year for PlayStation Plus.
And this doesn’t even take into account what playing on PlayStation Now will be like. Instantly being able to play a selection of games is great, but if that experience suffers from noticeable input lag and image deterioration the point of the whole thing comes tumbling down. A 7-day free trial will be key for many people, and Sony will have to ensure a smooth service in order to convert fence sitters.
Seemingly obvious bonuses for PS Plus members are also strange in their absence. A discount would have gone down very well, but another idea could potentially have been even better. Given the massive digital library of older titles we’re all amassing thanks to PS Plus, free access to these via PS Now would have been great. It’d also serve as a way to tempt me into subscribing to the full service.
As it stands (with UK pricing and availability still to be announced), PlayStation Now is a service that stands on the edge of greatness. Giving tens of millions of devices access to a massive back catalogue covering 20 years of PlayStation at a reasonable price would be too tempting to pass up. But at around four times the cost of a PS Plus membership my interest is currently far too low.
