Video game news, video game reviews, walkthroughs, video game mods, and game trailers

Activity Feed

Rank: Newbie

Status

Site Activity

Default-user FreePSNPS4
Justinsmw747 said:
their charging to make up for the investment of dropping the console price ???? what a crock of crap with the console its a 1 time payment you pay...
Thats how it should be Now you are paying $400 to own one half of your console and renting out the other half with annual payments. They wanted to be sure the consumer could purchase the console for $400 and they also wanted to make sure they could milk another $400-$500 out of the consumer in online multiplayer payments
Default-user FreePSNPS4
FreePSNPS4 said:
If they are so confident in their product and it's such a great value, they wouldn't need to bait people into paying for it by putting online...
I agree MS set the precedent for pay to play multiplayer, but that doesn't excuse Sony from following suit. If MS had gotten away with implementing DRM and later down the line Sony adopted it, would Sony be excused from doing DRM because MS had already done it? No, they both would have bad policies. MS having a bad policy for years doesn't justify Sony having a bad policy now.
Default-user FreePSNPS4
FreePSNPS4 said:
If they are so confident in their product and it's such a great value, they wouldn't need to bait people into paying for it by putting online...
But as already stated, I don't have interest in those features. So for me PSN is perfect. I get the basic features I need for free. I see how other people would like those feature however, which is why I think they should be behind PS+. I understand they invested alot of money in them and need some form of payback, I just feel making it mandatory for people to pay for the servive who don't want it is wrong. Put all the advanced features behind PS+, but leave basic online multiplayer out and leave that free. Surely that would draw in alot of people to PS+, while leaving people like me who don't desire those features the ability to play online. I actually have 3 month PS+ card that came with my PS3, I'm waiting to use so I will try it eventually, but like I said I've been keeping track of the games they offer and can honestly say I'm not interested.
Default-user FreePSNPS4
FreePSNPS4 said:
If they are so confident in their product and it's such a great value, they wouldn't need to bait people into paying for it by putting online...
That's the problem I want to play online and am being forced to subscribe to a service I don't want to get to online mutliplayer which was and still should be free. I will not take into consideration what MS is doing as it is irrelevant. I never intended to get an XBOX One, so they can lock all the features behind a paywall and it still wouldn't change my opinion of PS4 locking online play behind a paywall. The short comings of MS don't erase the short comings of Sony. If I want a good service, I have to pay for it? That's funny I don't recall ever paying for PS3 online multiplayer and yes I consider PSN good, I don't care what anyone else says about it. I could play online and that's all I needed. I don't need cross game chat, I don't need streaming, and I don't need all of that other BS, but now I'm being forced to pay for it regardless. And I hate to break it to you mate, those "free" games you "get" are neither free nor owned. If you PAY $50 a year to get these games they are not free. What happens if you don't pay that $50? The games become inaccessible. What's that word to describe things that need to paid for continuously or else you lose them? OH YEAH! It's a rental. I don't care how much the games are worth, what sense does it make to pay for them if I'm not going to play them? So I can look at the pretty cover art? Oh yes such an amazing deal for me. I'm not interested in AC3, I'm not interested in Far Cry 3, I'm not interested in most games PS+ offers, so why the hell should I be forced to pay for the damn service. They can offer $5000 worth of content a year and it wouldn't make a bit of difference to me if I don't like the $5,000 worth of content. Like I stated, you may think it's a good deal, so by all means pay for it, nobody is telling you not to, but to alot of others PS+ is of no benefit to us yet we are being made to pay for it. Sounds like a bad deal to us
Default-user FreePSNPS4
If they are so confident in their product and it's such a great value, they wouldn't need to bait people into paying for it by putting online behind a paywall. Online gamers that don't have Plus on PS3 because they see no value in it, and yes not everyone sees value in PS+ you Sony fanboys, are essentially told tough shit, now you have to pay for it whether you want it or not. The PS4 offers me nothing feature wise over my PS3. Can use netflix without paying on PS3, can share games on PS3, no online checkins on PS3, and free online on PS3. No free online on PS4, the PS4 actually offers me less features than my PS3 and I'm referring to features I actually use, I don't care about streaming or cross game chat. Sony invested in all these features I and alot of other gamers don't care about and is telling us to foot the bill for them or we can't play online, that's bullshit. Put advanced features behind a paywall. The amount of people paying for Plus for those advanced features I'm sure would give Sony a good amount of money, while still giving people who have no interest in Plus the ability to play online. And spare me spiel about how PS+ offers you free games. Am I the only on who sees through that marketing ploy? If you are paying $50 year after year after year to get and keep ownership of these games they are not free. That's like saying you payed for Netflix and got free movies. I find that the comparison between Netflix and Plus is very accurate. Take Netflix for example. $8 a month and offers you access to hundreds of movies and shows. To some this is an amazing deal. They love the movies and tv shows Netflix offers. Netflix is worth it to them. Now to others Netflix is not worth it. It may offer them hundreds of movies, but they aren't interested in any of the movies Netflix offers. They find no value in Netflix, it doesn't matter how many movies it has, if they don't like them, they don't watch them, and it's a waste of money. Now Plus,very similar. $5 a month, offers access to hundreds of games. To some it's a great value, they love all the games Plus offers, they love their access to betas, and discounts. It's worth it to them. Now to others, it is not worth. They don't like the games Plus offers, they have no interest in betas, they don't like the games that are discounted and it's not because they are cheap, it's because they have limited taste.They find no value in Plus, it doesn't matter how many games it offers. If they don't like them, they don't play them, and becomes a waste of money. You can't tout the benefits of a service to you and act as if it will benefit everyone the same way, it just doesn't work that way. So Sony and the supporters of this mandate can keep drilling into our head what the service offers, it's not going to make a shred of difference. We know what it offers, the service is 3 years old. We've had every opportunity to purchase it, if we wanted it we would have had it. If only a small group of people see how making us pay for a service we don't want, to get access to a feature that was free on their previous 2 consoles is wrong, then I guess gaming is in a really bad state. Gamers need to wake up before they start charging us for even more basic features
Show Older Activity