Gamers keep on saying free games aren’t really free if you have to pay for a subscription fee. I beg to differ. When you buy a car, TV, or beer, sometimes you’ll receive: alloys, Blu-ray player, or a bottle opener. You’re adding to the value of product or service you’re already purchasing. You’re not getting charged more for that product or service. That value has already been determined. The value of the PlayStation Plus subscription fee was already determined before Outlast became a “free exclusive”. If Sony stops putting out free exclusives, then you’re just paying $50 a year for multiplayer.

But the focus on this topic is a bit off. Whether the perception of a game is “free” or a justification on the purchase itself, it’s arbitrary when assessing a target market’s value. This is why the PS4 console’s sales beat the competitions. Outlast is not a $60 title. But bundle that game in with other titles coming out this year. The result, a perceived value, which has exceeded the subscription fee (getting something for nothing=that’s value). The irony with the PC created Outlast exclusive is that’s Microsoft’s backyard. Also, Nintendo charging $15 for the new Dr. Mario seems even more egregious.

In the business terms, PS4 just raised the “switching costs” for PS4 owners. It’s going to cost you more trouble to stop playing the PS4 in the future. Switching to something different (people are fickle), is going to feel like a liability. Cable companies for example, retain consumer loyalty to their services based on this fact.

The creation of this PS4 business model is going to be written in college text books next to the Chapter on the creation of Walmart’s inventory management system. Sony’s foreign direct investment strategy is a very lovable juggernaut.

I’ve owned decade’s worth of gaming gear from every company. It was the great games, not company empathy as to why I purchased certain system over others. By the fourth quarter of 2014, Sony may be perceived as the lovable world console.