As it stands right now, the PS Plus loyalty offering completely trumps what Microsoft has to offer to their monthly Xbox LIVE subscribers, but Phil Spencer has tried to explain why at SXSW. However, no matter how much explaining is done, there is no denying that the PS Plus offering is miles better than the Games with Gold offering.
One reason why Phil Spencer feels as if the Games with Gold offering is a little different to the PS Plus games collection is that players can still get access to games, even after their subscription ends. Whilst this is true, surely Sony is putting a lot more effort into their deals to even think about allowing players to get access to games that are only a year old. In the case of Microsoft, most Games with Gold titles are five to eight years old already.
Phil Spencer stated at SXSW that, "One of our issues with Games with Gold, differences between the other system we get compared to, is the fact that with Games with Gold, you get to keep that game, regardless of whether you continue to subscribe. The business around Games with Gold, for us, is just fundamentally different from some of the the other programs that are out there, which does put a different financial picture on a - you're going to go buy a game that's brand new, the cost of putting that in, just to be kind of blunt about it."
However, despite all of the explaining, Phil finally revealed that he's been sitting down with the guys behind the project, and that in the future he thinks "you'll see at least something that feels more true to what I think Games with Gold should look like with the constraints that are there." He didn't seem to mention what these constraints were.