• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

The Official Sony E3 2013 thread

Page 25 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Yeah, but look at the value that ps+ gives gamers with free games and heavily discounted games every single week. And their free games are 5 year old games that you can get for $2.50 at a flea market.
 
Imported said:
Bit different when you could choose. Now we're forced to pay to play online with either system. I haven't touched online gaming for the 360/PS3 in almost 6 months now though.
Click to expand...

not different at all - you can't play a portion of the game without paying a monthly fee.
 
American Gunner said:
Yeah, but look at the value that ps+ gives gamers with free games and heavily discounted games every single week. And their free games are 5 year old games that you can get for $2.50 at a flea market.
Click to expand...

so now the justification by the ps camp is "well at least ps+ is a better value than xbl" ?

haha, whatever makes you sleep better at night.

bottom line is many of you cried about how stupid it was to pay to play games online and that you would NEVER EVER do it, but are going to be doing it in a few months.
 
purbeast0 said:
wish i could go back to all the xbl vs psn threads and find all of the sony fanboys who LOL'ed about paying for xbl just to play games online, and then find them in these ps4 threads all excited about the ps4 and having no problem to pay for ps+ just to play ps4 online.
Click to expand...

I haven't owned a PS system since the 2, but now that I've written off MS this gen, I don't have issues paying for PS+ since I've been paying for XBL for at least the last 3 years.
 
purbeast0 said:
not different at all - you can't play a portion of the game without paying a monthly fee.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I meant the previous gen, 360/PS3, it was different in you weren't forced to play online, which would draw the ire of some. This coming gen, we're all forced to pay to play online so its not a rallying point for anyone.
 
Um...I own a 360 and paid for live for the last 7 years. I never said I would never pay for online gaming, but I am looking at the bigger picture. The one thing I love on MS is the party chat, but apparently they will have that on the PS4. Plus I can get a lot of discounted games or free games every week with my plus membership, and MS is trying to brag about finally giving us free games and they throw out Halo 3 and AC2. Woohoo, way to go MS, you really hit that one out of the park 🙄
 
basslover1 said:
I haven't owned a PS system since the 2, but now that I've written off MS this gen, I don't have issues paying for PS+ since I've been paying for XBL for at least the last 3 years.
Click to expand...

yeah well you aren't one of the people who was like "I WILL NEVER PAY TO PLAY ONLINE I ALREADY PAID FOR THE GAME I SHOULDNT HAVE TO PAY MORE TO USE ANOTHER PART OF THE GAME" like many people on this forum did. and now they are going to do it.

Imported said:
Sorry, I meant the previous gen, 360/PS3, it was different in you weren't forced to play online, which would draw the ire of some. This coming gen, we're all forced to pay to play online so its not a rallying point for anyone.
Click to expand...

yeah but i'm not talking about an x vs. y point to make, i'm talking about those who said they already bought the game and would never pay more to access a portion of the game they already paid for. well if you get a ps4, and want to game online, you will be paying more.
 
One thing you do forget, a lot of people are already PS+ members because they saw the value of it and will continue simply because of that. I am in that group. I think paying to be able to play multiplayer is absolute bullshit, though I almost never play my console games online either. I'll continue my PS+ membership not because of multiplayer as I wont use that much at all probably but because all everything is PS+ has been and will continue to offer.

A lot of people sub to PS+ already due to the tremendous value it offered and I bet they continue for that sole reason alone even if multiplayer wasn't put behind that paywall. It is BS like I said it is now behind a paywall.

But guess what, this is one of the things those of us were trying to explain to people saying they are buying the X1 and its DRM/Online/Used games crap. If people show they are willing to put up with shit, eventually others will follow foot and do the same thing making it standard and screwing everyone over. Sony watched MS do it for years with Live Gold and how people lapped it up like it was so amazing thing, now Sony has followed and is charging for multiplayer too.

What do you think is honestly going to happen next gen if they see the used games/online drm become widely accepted? This is what a lot of us were talking about as a stepping stone but too many of you want to stick your fingers in your ears and go I don't care its my money nanabooboo.
 
gorcorps said:
It's also funny how much Sony has bounced back from their PSN hack debacle. Tons of accounts with personal info were stolen and PSN was down for a month, but nobody seems to care anymore.
Click to expand...

To be fair I was much more annoyed and much more negatively affected by the 4 Fat 360's I went through before eventually giving up and buying a new slim just so I could play games without constant crashes.
 
Kev said:
To be fair I was much more annoyed and much more negatively affected by the 4 Fat 360's I went through before eventually giving up and buying a new slim just so I could play games without constant crashes.
Click to expand...

Both console makers made a lot of shoddy consoles to release their consoles "on time". It was very disappointing. But MS was very accommodating when my 360 stopped working eventually so I wasn't mad. I never wanted a white 360 anyway, so when I got a black one I was happy. Never had a problem with a black 360 yet.
 
American Gunner said:
Yeah, but look at the value that ps+ gives gamers with free games and heavily discounted games every single week. And their free games are 5 year old games that you can get for $2.50 at a flea market.
Click to expand...

I would have totally jumped on the PS+ service if the "Free Games" remained with me if i should ever let my PS+ membership lapse... as it is (now) its a elaborate rental service, which has me paying for random DLC/Digital Game discounts....

🙁
 
mmntech said:
Hold on a minute, did Sony seriously just lie yesterday when they said the PS4 would allow used games? Jack Tretton is now claiming otherwise. First party yes, third party it's up to the publisher. That's the same as the GD Xbox One! Glad I didn't pre-order.
http://kotaku.com/third-party-publi...m_source=Kotaku_Twitter&utm_medium=Socialflow
Click to expand...

no, it's essentially the same as it is now. For instance, if EA wants to make a game with a key locked to your account, they can.
 
mmntech said:
How so?
Click to expand...

because any 3rd party publisher could implement a drm if they wanted to. the only one who did anything close to it (i think) is ea with their online passes. not drm per se but the closest thing we have to it on consoles. i don't know if there were any mmorpg's or anything for console that also required a monthly fee tied to an account or not.

also with dlc games only, you can't transfer them or resell them.
 
It is no different than how it is on the PS3/360. They can use a key to lock the game to an account if they want too, they could implement always on DRM for a game. In fact a few games even tried it on the PS3 and it fail miserably and wasn't touched again.
 
KaOTiK said:
It is no different than how it is on the PS3/360. They can use a key to lock the game to an account if they want too, they could implement always on DRM for a game. In fact a few games even tried it on the PS3 and it fail miserably and wasn't touched again.
Click to expand...

yeah i thought there were some that did it but i couldn't think of any. do you know which games they were?
 
mmntech said:
Hold on a minute, did Sony seriously just lie yesterday when they said the PS4 would allow used games? Jack Tretton is now claiming otherwise. First party yes, third party it's up to the publisher. That's the same as the GD Xbox One! Glad I didn't pre-order.
http://kotaku.com/third-party-publi...m_source=Kotaku_Twitter&utm_medium=Socialflow
Click to expand...

No, the PS4 has a similar system the to the way the 360 and PS3 currently operate. There's no DRM for single player games, games aren't tied to one account that must be periodically checked by the cloud to make sure it's being played on the correct console, there's no limitation to how or where I want to sell or trade my current games.

The publisher (EA) can implement as they see fit which they do now but only for online multi-player (at least IME). so what the PS4 offers, is the exact same thing that the PS3 and 360 offers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top