Was talking about PSNow on release not in 2 years time, when the sales start dwindling all good, that what i was saying

Okay let’s take your example. Rockstar can choose whether it wants to offer their game on Playstation Now if it wants to! Who knows how much publishers have to pay to have their games on a platform via the traditional model vs PSNow’s fees/royalty arrangements, but Rockstar can simply choose not to have the game on PSNow and go directly for the PS3’s install base and deal with the risks of diminishing engagement from its users or put it on PSNow or do both. I’m pretty sure they know best when sales dwindle enough for it to put on a subscription service. Think about how movies eventually make their way to Netflix. Without having read Mr. Pachter’s entire article, I hope we are not taking his words out of context but I don’t understand what’s wrong with a publisher waiting for 2 years of physical/digital download sales before placing a game on Playstation now. From my understanding the majority of a traditional game’s sales happen within the first 2 years anyway. Having a 2 yr old game on a subscription service seems like a natural way to squeeze more juice out of a title.

Suffice to say, Pachters “analysis” has already been proven wrong. Since those 4 games were released last year (March (Gow), June (TLOU) , September(Puppeteer) & October(Beyond)). Does anyone else wonder how much money this guy gets paid just to talk a bunch of crap.

Streaming for old PS3 games will be ok on it, if theres newish PS3 games like GTA5 for example cant imagine rockstar wanting to lose out on sales by offering it for cheap when they dont have to. Thats got a multiplayer side so youd have to keep renting it which could cost you more in the long term, then to make it viable for sony they have to take a cut so reduces the amount going to rockstar. Cant see it happening properly. First party will be on cus sony will of forced them to put it on.