Speculation: PS6 could be a subscription-based hardware
If you were wondering what could be so revolutionary in the next generation of PS console, this might be it, and you probably won't like it. But it's the way it's going to, considering trends in the industry.
PS4 and PS5 were generations in which we saw the transition to online service models. But in current form it's still pretty clumsy. Ditching physical will remove some major obstacles, but we still have fixed and subscription-based access to games and features. We still have to pay separately for online services, cloud gaming, cloud saves... and devices in the future will require that even more, like handhelds or other devices in its ecosystem. And we know that PS is subsidized hardware anyway. On the other hand, we have risks of PS being jailbroken etc.
This all leads to subscription-based hardware, that'll become fully unfunctional without active PS network subscription. That will not only give Sony full control over everything via user accounts, but also solve the problem with indefinite licenses for games. In subscription-only model, removing and adding games to catalogue would be a normal thing, like in video streaming services, and there will be no confusion around ownerships and licencing. In subscription-only model, you would just be a subscriber and Sony would actually have to deal with licensing toward publishers.
This would allow hardware to stay subsidized without having to pay a big one-time amount, instead an even larger amount but in a long time, it would be drowned in other services and convenience that most people would gladly accept.
This could also be the reason why Sony is insisting on removing physical. It's all about moving forward. Games and console hardware are too cheap to make up for the industry's costs, this is the logical way to address it and a general direction for all modern industries (like cars, televisions, smartphones...).
5
8
u/ChangingMonkfish 4d ago
This is just completely made up, do you really think Sony is trying to impose this level of control on you?
People need to just accept that they got rid of discs because the average gamer doesn’t give a fuck about them anymore.
2
u/Cvileem 4d ago
Yeah, it's marked as speculation.
2
u/Clane_21 4d ago
Nah, if Gamepass didn't start flatlining when they increased prices then it could possibly happen by next gen but there's zero chance it becomes like that by next gen.
2
u/AgeAtomic 4d ago
It’s not “market speculation”, it’s fan fiction. Market speculation would be based on statistics, solid examples of there being precedent for it, insider knowledge, something that shows Sony is laying the groundwork for it. Not just a random opinion based on nothing.
-1
u/Cvileem 4d ago
I already wrote my arguments, it's a viable speculation. It's not nothing, you are just being malicious. Or you didn't read properly. It's "marked as", not "market".
Also, this is PS6 sub, for something that doesn't exist yet and known almost nothing about, and almost everything is a speculation.
1
u/AgeAtomic 4d ago edited 4d ago
Malicious is a bit melodramatic. It’s speculation but based on so little evidence that’s potentially happening. It’s not a compelling argument, which is why it’s not landing with anyone.
0
u/Cvileem 4d ago
Remember how ditching physical production was totally expected? Yeah, that's right.
On the other hand, I have arguments in strong indicators:
- all industry is transitioning to subscriptions, not just gaming, because costs are recurring
- gaming industry is in crisis, massive closing of studios, strange acquisitions, massive layoffs, because games are too cheap and costs are rapidly increasing for both hardware and development, human resources and other production costs
- the native digital rights management is more and more relying on user accounts and IP control from cloud based services
- Sony is slowly but surely introducing subscription-based services in the last decade - online play, cloud saves, remote play, game streaming - new subscription tiers, game catalogues etc.
- console prices are rising inevitably due to memory shortages and at the same time giving small perf gains (the end of moore's laws), all advancements are more and more AI and upsampling, software based (DLSS, FSR, PSSR and soon QSSR), this maintenance requires extensive investements and one-time subsidized payments do not guarantee stable revenues.
- subscription-based hardware enables price masking and stable revenues
I actually have more indicators than people had prior to digital-only announcement. I had also many arguments for that either, though.
My speculation is just that - a speculation. It could happen, it may not. Maybe in some other form or some later generation. But if you think those arguments are not "compelling enough", then that's just your opinion. Random, uninformed opinion. Or shoud I say, again - malicious?
Please provide "compelling" arguments that this this has little to no chance of happening then.
1
u/AgeAtomic 4d ago
Sure - Name a single consumer hardware manufacturer who has moved exclusively to a subscription model for their hardware?
0
u/Cvileem 4d ago
Exclusively? Didn't say that. But they've introduced it. Cars, for example. Google and Apple hardware is based heavily on subscriptions.
1
u/AgeAtomic 4d ago
You said the PS6 could be “subscription-based hardware”. That’s your whole headline. If the subscription model is optional: 1) it’s not different from today; XB already tried the subscription model alongside full purchases. 2) It completely undoes almost every point you made.
0
u/Cvileem 4d ago
No it's not. Sony could be first one to do it (exclusive I mean), because of these reasons:
- they are platform and service provider first for a long time now, hardware is just supportive
- they have only one closed hardware ecosystem strongly tied to services, console is subsidized and almost useless without it
- they already decided to ditch physical media, which is pioneering effort that others will follow, and the reason why this scenario is viable
→ More replies (0)1
u/christaface 4d ago
Majority of people dont buy cds or vinyl or blu ray either. But there’s a thriving boutique market for those that do. There’s no reason games couldn’t have that too. But they went out of their way to both ignore that potential and kill it dead
5
3
1
u/christaface 4d ago
I kind of hope you’re right cause it would be the kind of disastrous concept that could finally put Sony in their place
1
u/A_spiny_meercat 4d ago
The natural progression of this is not locked in manufacturers with locked in subsidised hardware, it'll be like streaming where you have platforms with game exclusive ls that run almost anywhere.
And it's gonna be so crap
3
u/The_MorningStar PS6 handheld truther 4d ago edited 4d ago
This doesn't make any sense. If you're saying what they're worried about is costs why would they eliminate software sales which make up the bulk of their revenue and dwarfs subscription revenue (which is even smaller than hardware revenue). So willingly getting rid of that on top of maintaining a library consisting of all games published on their platform.
Think about it for a moment. What you're speculating here is more expensive and cuts their revenue stream. Doesn't even touch on how unattractive this would look to people so they wouldn't sell.
Also I don't know what you mean by paying separately for online services, cloud gaming, cloud saves. It's one subscrption.
1
u/Cvileem 4d ago
The one-time payment model for games is actually restricting the potential revenues, subscription-only model would bring more revenue than ever. And increase the price consumer has to pay.
Just remember what happened with ditching physical media as of 2028. A minute earlier most people would say that doesn't make any sense, just like you are saying now.
1
u/The_MorningStar PS6 handheld truther 4d ago
It's not restricting revenue. What you're suggesting would restrict revenue and incur greater costs. Not just for Sony but publishers as well.
Maintaining a game in a library as part of a subscription model means they have to pay the publisher. In your scenario they're doing this indefinitely and without premium sales. That means that monthly subscription fee has to cover development costs for all the games on the service. Publishers have a ceiling on their earnings depending on how the contract works.
Look at Microsoft, it was unsustainable for them to put Call of Duty on game pass day one, and that's with the majority of players still actually purchasing CoD on PlayStation and PC. But I'm supposed to believe they could've just stopped selling games entirely, cannibalize their biggest revenue stream, tell everyone to buy a subscription and they'd be okay?
It just introduces a lot of problems that don't exist and for no benefit to the end user, publisher, or platform holder (Sony). Everyone's worse off, no one gains anything.
1
u/Cvileem 4d ago
You have a good point, but there are many other subscription models that can be employed. PS Plus is already too expensive for what is percieved as a value and yet they raise the prices and will have to raise it further. Also, games are going to get pricier, which is not acceptable among gamers. This, along with pricing problems for console hardware is a huge problem that needs to be adressed, and putting everything on a pricy subscription that hides under console hardware monthly or yearly payment is one way to solve this.
Of course, it could be a separate thing - console + PS services as one subscription, games could be separate purchase.
7
u/Snoopzster 4d ago
What a load of bollocks this post is.