PlayStation Plus is on everyone's lips after Sony has decided to reveal its "new" creature to the globe: yes, I use quotation marks because in fact the subscription offered by the Japanese company which (let's face it openly) in many they expected it to be some kind of copy / paste of service Xbox Game Pass from Microsoft, actually brings together the two solutions of PlayStation Now and PS Plus precisely, then offering a third level of subscription that guarantees some little extras (and I would like to see given the not exactly friendly cost, we talk about 119,99€ for the annual).
Price battle aside, I wondered on whether these services really make sense: observing the reactions of users on various social networks, such as Facebook groups, Telegram chats, Instagram pages and various content creators from the world of YouTube and Tik Tok, I realized one thing: even the gaming world has turned into "McDonald's or Burger King".
Let's be clear: I love McDonald's and Burger King, I even worked there when I was very young and it was a great experience, so the above comparison should be read with due consideration. Although the fast-food restaurant chain is renowned for its affluence and style, it is undeniable that any self-respecting Spaniard prefers a standard restaurant kitchen (or starred, why not) as we boast the best chefs in the world.
Tornando a PlayStation Plus ed Xbox Game Pass, these today are competing for offers in a rapidly expanding market. Let's talk outside the teeth: do these services really make sense? Well on the one hand they seem in great demand and the players "slaughter" themselves on social networks to defend their favorite products (we have from the console war to the service war?), some praise sudden flag changes and how much better things are on the other side of the river. So, in a sense, the answer to the question is "yes, subscription services make sense because there is demand", but paradoxically what I read online belies itself.
Let me explain, recent international and national research shows that on average, only 35% of players complete a title, a percentage that rises slightly if we also consider PC gamers (who are in fact gamers of the Microsoft cosmos):
|Ranges||Tutorial completed||Story completed||Story completed as % of Tutorial completed|
|Shadow of War||65.7||14.3||21.8|
|Dark Souls 3||92.9||23.2||25.0|
|Sniper Elite 4||73.3||29.5||40.2|
|Shadow of Mordor||88.5||36.3||41.0|
|Wolfenstein New Colossus||93.9||50.6||53.9|
|Wolfenstein: Old Blood||94||57.4||61.1|
|Wolfenstein: new order||76||46.8||61.6|
Following the interactional source from which I kindly borrowed the table, we can say that basic video games are almost never finished, or rather, if you had nine gamer friends and you were the tenth, probably only four of you actually make it to the end of a game. This brings us back to the original question: what's the point of spending $ 119,99 per year (in Sony's case) to get access to a library of 400 (theoretical) titles se poi se ne will they really complete two or three?
Also I ask you: How many of you could swear that they would play a game released ten, fifteen or even twenty and broken years ago with the same intensity with which you face today an Elden Ring, a Horizon: Forbidden West or Gran Turismo 7? Let's be honest: very few would, and although I am an eternal nostalgic and the older I get the more I discover a boundless passion for "old style" games (like Hollow Knight, whose review I recommend) I certainly wouldn't play Tomb Raider II or Soul Reaver running them on PlayStation 5 with an OLED TV which would allow me to (literally) count the pixels.
There is nothing wrong with enjoying healthy retrogaming, let's be clear indeed, for many it is a spasmodic obsession that leads to the most unbridled collecting and I understand this: looking for games, spending hours and hours on online markets or around the country during fairs, learning how to recognize a state "Triple A" from a "double B" e confront with other enthusiasts, it's healthy and fun.
Recently a North American boy won the Guinness World Record is preferably used for largest video game collection in the world, it is estimated that it is worth $ 1,6 Million (I propose the video above). Well, explain to me now what effect it would have on you if he wanted to show you his private digital collection: how would he do it? He'd show you one huge amount of servers that hold your video game files? Loads of numbered HDDs? Owning digital games is like owning NFTs (Non Fungible Tokens) and define himself as a collector of works of art, works of which anyone could take screenshots and use, perhaps printing it and putting it in a frame. What would Vincent Van Gogh think of this art form? He'd probably gouge out his eyes this time, not his ear.
PlayStation Plus e Xbox Game Pass offer a hit and run fun therefore, where the flavor does not really matter but only the peel, where it is sufficient to press download to be able to tell friends that you have played the game of the minute which, most likely, will be forgotten tomorrow. There is a risk of losing the sense of waiting and fruition as a search for the product that a person desires, you risk the Netflix effect that is the behavior that afflicts the streaming vision services, where many do not reach the end of a product or it they drop out in half - in the case of a TV series - why bombarded and attracted by last minute news. We are going in a direction that from my point of view offers many opportunities e appalling disadvantages which we should take into account: in essence, as long as they exist and resist consoles with the optical reader we will have a possibility or an alternative, when this will no longer happen, I will be there to blame you by saying "I told you so!" ... but maybe we should to blame only ourselves and our greed.