Sony’s PlayStation Now recently went through a change where it was discontinued from all devices except the PS4 and PC, with the reason likely being to focus on the platforms where it is most popular. Now Sony has confirmed another change, and one some have been asking for. Later on this year PlayStation Now will begin to stream PS4 games, though it hasn’t been confirmed what will make the list.
In the next few weeks Sony will be testing the new additions and current PS Now subscribers will be sent invites if they’re selected to take part. There is no news on whether Sony will be expanding PS Now to new nations yet.
Source: PS Blog
Avenger
Come on, that doesn’t make sense. They ought to make it a download not a stream, at least that would make it worthwhile on PS4.
PC is the only reason for this, and it’s impressive but a bit of a stretch if they don’t put the modern first party games on there.
Tony Cawley
I don’t agree, it’s value lies in being a streaming service. I don’t want to download 50 gig every time I want to try a game out.
Avenger
I’m skeptical about game streaming though, plus I don’t see the point of a PS4 streaming to a PS4 just to avoid the HDD space/download.
Good for trying games, but a download would be good if you want to go the whole hog and play the game. With the cost of the service too, not unjustified, but puzzling to place PS4 games behind that kind of pay Wall, except for the PC factor.
Tuffcub
I don’t see any downsides tbh – 100+ games, including PS4 ones, for a tenner a month. The only reason I haven’t got it is because I have a huge pile of shame as it is.
tonyyeb
Only issue I have is that when I tried PS Now was the input lag. Dirt 3 was unplayable. If that is sorted then I’d probably be in line to try it again.
Avenger
Don’t get me wrong, it’s not a downside. Just puzzling why anyone would want to stream ps4 games to a PS4.
TrumpyMx
I think a change in charging model is needed too. PSnow is really good, but for me, the all you can eat monthly model doesn’t work (it might work for others). For me a more expensive, hourly model would work better, say £10 for 10hrs of gameplay that only charges for what you use, and say put a 12 month expiry on the hours.
Nera Eris
Having it monthly would make people think its good value. For paying hours for one game, thats probably a bit dumb to do.
TrumpyMx
I couldn’t commit to getting my money worth on a umetered month pass, but would get 10 hours out of a 10hr pass.
TrumpyMx
In other words, it’s missing the dip in and out factor, i have to give a 1 month commitment of time to make a 1 month sub worthwhile.
Starman
As a service that seems aimed at letting you try games out, a per hour approach would see you quickly go past the current monthly charge after trying a few games. After all, you don’t know if you’ll want to play something for 10 hours. And imagine the frustration if you reached the final boss and your time ran out!
TrumpyMx
But you paid for 10 hrs and got 10hrs, not paid for a month and managed 1hr
Starman
A clear response to xbox game pass, and something I’ve seen people asking for really. A shame they’ve scrapped it for vita as I’d have definitely subbed to be able to play some ps4 games on it.
Avenger
I don’t think I would have, a stream just doesn’t cut it for some gaming experiences, not these days at least.
CR8ZYH0RSE
To be Fair shouldn’t Sony be putting the PS4 games on PS Plus first before streaming them on PS Now?
TrumpyMx
Why? Give us sound business reasons.
CR8ZYH0RSE
No! :)
Ed the Penguin
Not a game-changer for most, but if they could implement at least 5.1, rather than their current stereo streams, I’d be in.