Do you think that the PS Plus price increase will cause a large and noticeable decrease in players in daily races?

[furryboy96]

For those that don't know, PS Plus will be getting a large price increase. Do you think that this will cause a large and noticeable decrease of players in daily races? https://www.ign.com/articles/sony-r...-plus-12-month-subscriptions-across-all-tiers

 

[Rossell2]

If you believe the load of Redditors showing screenshot of their cancellations going "time to send a message" (while still paying for Netflix, Disney and Amazon Prime) then maybe. I highly doubt it though in the long run.

Just do the wise thing and buy the subscription in Black Friday or Xmas sales and stack them.

 

[A_Higher_Place]

.

Just do the wise thing and buy the subscription in Black Friday or Xmas sales and stack them.

The cynical part of me believes that stacking will be taken away in the future.

 

[MOPARbarrett5]

I think in the short term new players that liked the movie will mask that old players might be leaving so overall numbers will stay the same or even go up a bit, but after a few months when the movie hype dies down and the new players see only lackluster updates, no GT Academy probably ever again, falsely advertised "daily" races that even are repeats, and almost no communication by PD I think a higher percent of people will leave then even the average percent price increase for ps+.

 

[Nebuc72]

I do - based on who I know, I think a decent portion of GT7s online playerbase only really ever play GT7 online, and many won't be willing to put up with such a drastic increase just for one game.

 

[Nakano219]

I do think it will cause people to not renew, but I don't think it'll be immediately "noticeable" in that it'll be a steady, gradual decline rather than a steep drop, so it'll be hard to distinguish PS Plus as the cause rather than just the natural dropoff of a game growing older and newer rivals coming out.

It won't be that in two weeks time a third of the playerbase will have already gone where we can say "yeah, that's because of the price rise".

 

[shio]

Yeah, I also think it's not going to have a noticeable drop off moreso than the game just aging over time. Even though the price increase sucks, at the end of the day, an extra $20 a year for a service I get a lot of enjoyment out of is still worth it, and I expect a lot of people will feel similarly.

You can barely buy a single meal for two people at McDonald's for that price difference nowadays anyways, lol.

 

[AmyUD06]

For those that don't know, PS Plus will be getting a large price increase. Do you think that this will cause a large and noticeable decrease of players in daily races? https://www.ign.com/articles/sony-r...-plus-12-month-subscriptions-across-all-tiers

LOL. In what world is $1.67 a month a "large price increase." Jesus you people are absolutely insane.

 

[BigSarj]

LOL. In what world is $1.67 a month a "large price increase." Jesus you people are absolutely insane.

I agree that it's not going to be a big deal for most people and this is just typical online sensationalism but, personally, I try not to judge people's financial situations. Surely there will be a few or more people who will have to make a somewhat difficult choice when it's time to renew.

 

[Eggstor]

LOL. In what world is $1.67 a month a "large price increase." Jesus you people are absolutely insane.

When it's a 33.3% increase, $1.67/month, or if you prefer, $20/year is a large price increase.

Oh, and the Extra plan is going up $35/year (35.0% increase), while the Premium plan is going up $40/year (33.3% increase).

 

[Revengel]

I agree that it's not going to be a big deal for most people and this is just typical online sensationalism but, personally, I try not to judge people's financial situations. Surely there will be a few or more people who will have to make a somewhat difficult choice when it's time to renew.

(emphasis is mine)

This.

Give three people $20. One person may go to McDonalds. Another person may go to see Gran Turismo and buy a small drink. One person may shop for a weeks worth of groceries with that same $20.

I've been in the last category. Actually, far less that that going back to my early adulthood.

When a choice has to be made it's not normally on a daily basis, it's on a "I-just-got-this-bill" basis. For a single bill, $20 can be a deal breaker for many.

 

[BangsMcCoy]

Lets think about it.

Are people unhappy about the price increase? Yes.
Will some people not renew because of it? Yes.
Will the vast majority of those people then buy a subscription again within a short time? Yes. See below.

Will people that currently have an Extra or Premium tier downgrade to a lower tier instead of completely doing away with PS Plus? Absolutely.
While it’s nice to have the extras that comes with Extra and Premium tiers, Essential is all you need to play multiplayer online and dropping from Extra or Premium to Essential will actually save you money even with new increased prices factored in. Worst case scenario (for Sony) more people will have Essential subscriptions. Long term they’re not going to lose many subscribers. People will more than likely sacrifice the benefits of Extra and Premium and downgrade tiers rather than completely do away with PS Plus, if online/multiplayer gaming is something they enjoy.

Even if you’re on the lower end of the income spectrum, this isn’t a large amount of money ($20 over an entire year if on and keeping Essential, or you actually can save money if you’re currently on a higher tier and downgrade) and if needed sacrifices will be made elsewhere to keep even the Essential PS Plus plan so you can continue to use the online/multiplayer features of the games you own.
Maybe you’ll choose to by store brand socks instead of those name brand socks and put that $20 towards PS Plus? Maybe you’ll forego having McDonalds one day to have PS Plus?

Depending on how closely you pay attention to the number of people online in GT7 you won’t notice it in the sense it impacts your ability to race against others. It’s not like it will be a ghost town where you won’t find hardly anyone else online playing.

 

[Talon16]

The extra amount of money they'll get from the increase will be greater than the amount of money they'll lose from cancellations.

They've done the math, believe that.

 

[kjb]

I don't think it will have a big impact on that.

 

[Revengel]

Maybe you’ll choose to by store brand socks instead of those name brand socks and put that $20 towards PS Plus? Maybe you’ll forego having McDonalds one day to have PS Plus?

I am not The Lorax; I don't speak for the trees.

That said, my experience is the choice won't be between a trip to McDonalds one day or name brand socks; these are subscriptions that are presents and/or family purchases . . . as well as individuals who don't believe they have that much free cash to spend on a subscription. For a parent who initially purchased 2 plans for each PS playing kid in the house, this represents a $40 increase on a bill that's not a necessity. As a result, they may decide the two have to share the subscription. This represents a choice between "my mobile bill just went up" and "my PS Plus plan just went up." #ImLookingAtYouAT&T.

We know getting store brand socks doesn't normally translate directly into let's save for "X." Normally it's more "this is what I have to spend right now."

That is what the PS Plus plan may run afoul of.

The extra amount of money they'll get from the increase will be greater than the amount of money they'll lose from cancellations.

They've done the math, believe that.

They've done the estimated math, that's for sure.

I'm certain they did a similar analysis before the launch of GT7 and the in-game economy #Microtransactions

 

[Meythia]

The price increase is the answer to all of us players getting more stingy about price increases, which in the end are making us do purchases on discounts only 🙄

I am worried about the prospect of gaming subscriptions (not online playing, but making games available at large).
Of course some smart people will have estimated to make profits of it vs hard sales, but I still prefer the hard sale of anything I want to own (or play on license for where it matters).
I see a relation between "free stuff" causing a price increase, because I literally dont understand how "free stuff" is going to create profits for the company. So I have expected this to happen very soon.

On topic: Reading the news didnt make me worry but instead just caused my next subscription stacking - I dont plan on stopping to play, this is part of my lifestyle I dont sacrifice. Rather do I stop going to cinemas or stop eating as many snacks and begin being more reasonable about all of that where I can take a step short instead ...

 

[BangsMcCoy]

I am not The Lorax; I don't speak for the trees.

That said, my experience is the choice won't be between a trip to McDonalds one day or name brand socks; these are subscriptions that are presents and/or family purchases . . . as well as individuals who don't believe they have that much free cash to spend on a subscription. For a parent who initially purchased 2 plans for each PS playing kid in the house, this represents a $40 increase on a bill that's not a necessity. As a result, they may decide the two have to share the subscription. This represents a choice between "my mobile bill just went up" and "my PS Plus plan just went up." #ImLookingAtYouAT&T.

We know getting store brand socks doesn't normally translate directly into let's save for "X." Normally it's more "this is what I have to spend right now."

That is what the PS Plus plan may run afoul of.

1) Why would you buy each kid in the house their own PS Plus subscription in the first place? Unless each kid has their own PlayStation console, why not have them share one PS Plus subscription as that’s all that is needed for all users/accounts on a console? If each kid has their own console, I further question how someone that has enough disposable income to buy multiple PS consoles and PS Plus subscriptions is suddenly incapable of spending an extra $40 over the course of an entire year, or is even that concerned about $40 a year in the first place.

2) If you still do want/need multiple PS Plus subscriptions so that each kid has their own, why not, as the parent/breadwinner and gift giver say “hey kids guess what, due to price increase you can each now only have Essential tier instead of the Extra or Extra tier now instead of Premium, but this way at least you can still enjoy your multiplayer games online with your friends.”? Or maybe ask them if there is some other sacrifice they’d be willing to make to keep the higher tier?

An added bonus is that if you downgrade tiers, you actually save money, yet still play multiplayer online. It’s not a lot of money, but you can use that money to start a savings account….or go blow it on something else if your mindset truly is “this is what I have to spend right now”.

 

[Nathan88]

Won't make the slightest difference to PS+ subscribers.

If anything, those who are invested in these things will be seeking out deals to stack up for years to come.

We saw similar discourse with game prices. People get bent out of shape about a £20/$20 increase, but also spend hundreds on a specialised controller, thousands on a state-of-the-art TV, and so on. Gaming is still extremely good value. But it's also down to the consumer to seek out deals, and not be suckered in by special editions, or needing to be a day one buyer.

 

[Stoobert]

I don't mind a price increase as that's expected, but when the new price vs my last renewal is now 48% higher (currency conversion), I am at the point where I can't justify keep paying for PS+ solely for Gran Turismo when the price is getting close to iRacing (yes, you have to buy the content separately, but the free content variety is as repetitive as the GT7 daily race combos).

If GT7 comes to PC, I would cancel, and I'm kind of at the point where my PSVR is gathering dust, not because it's crap, or not good, but because GT7 isn't really pulling me at the moment.

 

[NW_Saint]

I don't think it will have a big impact on that.

Straight!

I mean really, 20 bucks ?.. LoL.. as I say daily at least once "it's only money".. 20 bucks.. smh.. & the funny thing is I rarely race online, to me it's more of an option, as in if I wanna do I can do it, and if not oh well, but at least the option is there.. get a grip gentlemen..


NW.

 

[Talon16]

This is how the world works, guys. Every company does this: Amazon, Netflix, cable/internet companies, insurance, and even Sony. Again, they pay people a lot of money to make sure the math works out.

Subscription = $100/year and they have 10 subscribers. They increase the price to $150/year. Three people throw a fit and cancel. Guess what, $150x7 > than $100x10. They've lost three subs but are still making more money.

Sony is no different than anyone else... they're not so concerned about the quantity of customers rather the bottom line how much they make.

Anyway, everyone will have to decide for themselves. I will keep mine going. If nothing else, having your game data backed up to their cloud is huge to me. My original PS5 died and I'd have lost it all. But, I was able to d/l all my stuff to the new PS5 from the Sony cloud and didn't miss a beat. To each their own.

 

[LeGeNd-1]

The cheapest tier increased from $80 to $96 in AUD. That works out to an increase of 4.4 cents per day.

If that much money really makes a difference to your life, then I think you've got bigger problems than not being able to play games online and the time spent complaining on forums or social media could be better used for something else more productive.

Sure if you're living below poverty line in Africa that much money could mean the difference between life and death but let's face it, none of us here and the keyboard warriors at reddit is at that level.

No one likes paying more for the same thing but the state the world is in right now, be thankful that this is the stuff you're complaining about.

 

[C_Raccoon23]

The cheapest tier increased from $80 to $96 in AUD. That works out to an increase of 4.4 cents per day.

So how much higher does the price have to go before it’s deemed unreasonable since this is how we’re spinning it? By this logic, it’s okay if it eventually goes up to something like $260. That’s only $5 a week, so not a big deal, right?

If that much money really makes a difference to your life, then I think you've got bigger problems than not being able to play games online and the time spent complaining on forums or social media could be better used for something else more productive.

Sure if you're living below poverty line in Africa that much money could mean the difference between life and death but let's face it, none of us here and the keyboard warriors at reddit is at that level.

All of this is straw man. It has nothing to do with whether or not this increase puts us in trouble financially. The value is just no longer there for a lot of people now, especially since we’re not getting anything additional in return to justify the increase. They can get more out of their money by simply saving it or using it on something else they think will give them more bang for their buck.

I’ll be canceling because GT7 is the only game I play online and I refuse to pay more when the daily races aren’t interesting on most weeks and PD can’t be bothered to have online championships of a decent length running on a regular basis.

That being said, there really needs to be a cheap, basic option for just online multiplayer. I don’t care about the perks that comes with Essentials and from what I’ve seen elsewhere, I’m not the only one.

No one likes paying more for the same thing but the state the world is in right now, be thankful that this is the stuff you're complaining about.

There’s virtually always going to be some major issues going on in the world, so I think this is a moot point. When the COVID pandemic was in full swing and people were getting sick, dying and losing their jobs, there were still those who were concerned about getting their hands on a PS5 or XSX at a fair price and had time to complain about scalpers.

 

[Revengel]

1) Why would you buy each kid in the house their own PS Plus subscription in the first place? Unless each kid has their own PlayStation console, why not have them share one PS Plus subscription as that’s all that is needed for all users/accounts on a console? If each kid has their own console, I further question how someone that has enough disposable income to buy multiple PS consoles and PS Plus subscriptions is suddenly incapable of spending an extra $40 over the course of an entire year, or is even that concerned about $40 a year in the first place.

Two kids. Teenagers. Each wants his/her own progress (some kids are notorious for not wanting to share.) To quote a comedian:

"Parents are not interested in justice. Parents are interested in quiet."

A $40 dollar increase may be more than a parent wants to spend and decides "you two will have to share a profile." Perhaps that parent decides that money is better spent on a bottle of coping mechanisms. I vehemently oppose that approach, but some people do think along those lines.

2) If you still do want/need multiple PS Plus subscriptions so that each kid has their own, why not, as the parent/breadwinner and gift giver say “hey kids guess what, due to price increase you can each now only have Essential tier instead of the Extra or Extra tier now instead of Premium, but this way at least you can still enjoy your multiplayer games online with your friends.”? Or maybe ask them if there is some other sacrifice they’d be willing to make to keep the higher tier?

While I was focusing on the essential tier, downgrading is what I expect several in those upper tiers to do. Bang alongside you on this one.

An added bonus is that if you downgrade tiers, you actually save money, yet still play multiplayer online. It’s not a lot of money, but you can use that money to start a savings account….or go blow it on something else if your mindset truly is “this is what I have to spend right now”.

In theory this is the correct approach (IMHO) and not just for downgrading a tier or two. In practice many - I would say most - don't take a long-term view when it comes to financial issues . . . but that's somewhat off topic.

I will end with this:

$550 is not a lot of money when you have it to spend.
$5 is a lot of money when you don't have it to spend.


sorry for the long reply and my delayed response.

 

[Famine]

Two kids. Teenagers. Each wants his/her own progress

PS Plus is only needed for Online Multiplayer, nothing else, and if they have just one console then only one PS Plus subscription is required for that.

 

[Revengel]

PS Plus is only needed for Online Multiplayer, nothing else, and if they have just one console then only one PS Plus subscription is required for that.

Backup in the cloud for the win. Comes in handy should a PS5 bite the dust and you drag out the PS4 that has a compatible version of the game.

 

[AutumnalGlow]

Do I think it should? Yes. Do I think it will? No.

People are used to paying absurd amounts for subscription services now. Rather than offering a fair price (remember, it used to cost nothing on PC or the PS3 and earlier consoles), Sony and Microsoft started bundling free games in at the lowest tier to justify making you pay more for stuff you probably didn't really want. Now they're increasing prices, and what are you going to do about it? Stop playing games online? Not if that's how you like to play them. You're going to pay the price, and the CEO and shareholders will get a higher number in their bank accounts, and that's it. A few will cancel, the majority will stay and more than make up for the lost revenue from those who cancel. And those who cancel will likely end up resubscribing in the future anyway.

The rich demand a bigger share of your money, knowing you must pay that price or lose the thing you've been enjoying. That's subscription services.

 

[LeGeNd-1]

So how much higher does the price have to go before it’s deemed unreasonable since this is how we’re spinning it? By this logic, it’s okay if it eventually goes up to something like $260. That’s only $5 a week, so not a big deal, right?

All of this is straw man. It has nothing to do with whether or not this increase puts us in trouble financially. The value is just no longer there for a lot of people now, especially since we’re not getting anything additional in return to justify the increase. They can get more out of their money by simply saving it or using it on something else they think will give them more bang for their buck.

I’ll be canceling because GT7 is the only game I play online and I refuse to pay more when the daily races aren’t interesting on most weeks and PD can’t be bothered to have online championships of a decent length running on a regular basis.

That being said, there really needs to be a cheap, basic option for just online multiplayer. I don’t care about the perks that comes with Essentials and from what I’ve seen elsewhere, I’m not the only one.

There’s virtually always going to be some major issues going on in the world, so I think this is a moot point. When the COVID pandemic was in full swing and people were getting sick, dying and losing their jobs, there were still those who were concerned about getting their hands on a PS5 or XSX at a fair price and had time to complain about scalpers.

If it suddenly goes up double price then yes, that would be unreasonable for me. Or even a 50% increase. Currently it's a 20% increase which is on par with various inflation rates like groceries or fuel. Of course, the cutoff point of when it becomes unreasonable is different for different people. If a $1 increase is already too much for you, and online gaming isn't worthwhile anymore, then by all means quit 👍 For me, it is still worth it. Apart from games and movies I don't really have any other unnecessary spending so it' still within my "allowance" so to speak.

Whether or not it represents good value is dependent on each person. If I can't play GT online I would have to look somewhere else like iRacing, and that has even worse value proposition considering a yearly subscription cost more than PS+, and you only get a handful of cars and tracks with the starter pack. Whether or not the game or racing is better to justify it is a whole other discussion that I'm not going to go into.

Running the servers cost energy, and energy costs are spiraling out of control right now because of the war. Sony wants more money in their pockets. You want more money in their pockets. Everyone wants the same thing. It's just a matter of what your priorities are and the tradeoff of what is and isn't worthwhile. I could just skip lunch for one day and recoup that price difference. Would you?

It's all about perspective. $96 per year is 26 cents a day. Just think about that for a sec. If you go to an arcade 20 years ago to play Daytona USA for 5 mins that would the same price. Compare that experience to GT7 now. I want online to be free like back in the PS3 days but ultimately these are all #firstworldproblems because people have nothing else to complain about.

Anyway, one month from now people won't even care anymore. This thread will be forgotten and buried amongst all the other wishlist and various complaint threads. If you don't wanna pay, don't pay. I'll keep going. The world continues as usual.

 

[Skinny McLean]

Sony wants more money in their pockets. You want more money in their pockets.

I most certainly do not!

 

[Daxus]

Idk how long it has been 60€ for a year's subscription, but is has been a while now. The longer a company waits to up their prices, the larger that price increase will have to be to be effective for them. There has been crazy inflation over the past few years and operation costs have risen a lot.

People not renewing their subscription and alleviating pressure from the cloud services would also be a good thing, but won't matter as much, I think.

My only hope is that they use the extra income to up the quality of their MP connection/stability.