A McShea Article That Doesn't Make Me Sigh? What Madness is This?

  • 82 results
  • 1
  • 2
Avatar image for colourful_hippie
colourful_hippie

6335

Forum Posts

8

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

#51  Edited By colourful_hippie
@CptBedlam

@Colourful_Hippie said:

My only reason for keeping Gold is for multiplayer, it's pretty ridiculous that that's my only reason now. I don't care about the other perks because the 360 is no longer my primary gaming device. I love Gears's multiplayer and to a certain extent, Halo's, that I'm still hesitant in pulling the trigger on canceling my Gold despite not even playing enough multiplayer to justify the cost. All I know is that MS is going to pay for their hubris if they think they can pull this shit again with their next console.

You sure about that? Another Gears, Halo or whatever system-seller they will have and you will probably continue to pay for MP. And so will millions of others.

They have gamers by the balls. At the beginning of the generation MS will invest big time to secure themselves a few supremely awesome IPs and then they let people pay to play them MP for the whole of the generation. Pretty smart.

edit: The last sentence of McShea's article is evidence of how fucked we are: "Although my resolve weakens whenever a new Halo is released, I recognize that Gold is an exploitive business practice that should disappear into the ether when the next generation arrives."

In short: people know it's bullshit but they will continue to pay for it because they absolutely have to play exclusive game x. What do you think MS is gonna do?

I'm not buying the new console even if a new Gears and Halo game were launch titles. I don't have enough free time due to college and whatever little I have of it can be used up by my pc. It's easy for MS to keep doing what they're doing because we are already invested in the platform.

There's gonna be a reset in the next gen and Sony has the best chance to come out strong with a solid online platform and better prices. As for MS securing huge exclusives for the beginning of the next gen, we'll that's only a guess as of right now.
Avatar image for superfriend
superfriend

1786

Forum Posts

10

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#52  Edited By superfriend

@CptBedlam said:

@Superfriend: Given how MS usually operates, I'd say it's possible they bought themselves a year or two of Titan-exclusivity and Blizzard will have to deliver in time (roughly) if such a deal is in place.

edit: Okay, when I think about it... not really. Blizzard can't weaken their own Battle.Net platform like that.

Yep. Highly doubt Blizzard would release anything on console first. Maybe, just maybe a simultaneous launch.

Avatar image for quististrepe
QuistisTrepe

633

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#53  Edited By QuistisTrepe

@PandaBear said:

Another article about Xbox Live Gold not being worth the money compared to PSN?!?! INCREDIBLE!!!

On a side note, iPhone games like Angry Birds make a lot of money!!! Motion controls don't work so great!!! Publisher's hate second hand games!!! Japanese development isn't what it used to be!!! Micro-transactions are no good, sometimes!!! On disc DLC is stupid!!! MORE NEWS SOON PEOPLE!!! HOLD ON!!!

This issue was going to come back at some point as we transition to the next console gen, so there was some basis for the article.

I suppose paying an annual fee for the use of a media extender where I sometimes play a game (I'm all but a total PC gamer now) seems to be getting a bit old at this point. Agreed with the others in this thread, I cannot foresee MS continuing with the paid XBL Gold service when the next gen starts (or whenever Sony says it does).

Avatar image for fattony12000
fattony12000

8491

Forum Posts

22398

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

#54  Edited By fattony12000

Let mine lapse in December 2012, after eight years. Not that sad to see it go, had some damn fine fun times over dat broadband.

Avatar image for aterons
Aterons

207

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

#55  Edited By Aterons

@ll_Exile_ll said:

@Aterons said:

I always saw consoles as a "waste of money" kinda thing, paying more for a platform that gets out-dates faster and is almost un-upgradeable as opposed to buying the PC equivalent cheaper or with better specs at the same price ( and yes, OS is a cost as well but there are free OSs and as "bad" as it makes you pirating a MS OS is "fine" with them, even if they detect it they don't take any actions against you or the pirated OS ).

So as far as I am concerned you might as well charge for something like X-box live because said person that bought the console didn't care for the money=value thing in the first place.

What??????

The $400 Xbox I bought in 2005 still plays all the new games. If you were to make a $400 PC in 2005, it wouldn't play any games then, let alone now. I love my gaming PC, but it sure as hell cost more than a console and it certainly won't be up to date for the next 5-7 years. There are plenty of reasons to build a gaming PC, but the reasons you just gave are the exact opposite of true.

Well, i have to admit i have no clue about the PC market in 2005 but when i bought my PC mid 2009 for what would translate roughly at 450$ and I still run all games single player on max setting with reasonable fps and no stuttering/screen tearing unless something else i going on.

I will also be able to use this graphic card ( GTS 250 ) for another 2-3 years, my 4 GB RAM for another 1 or 2 at least and i will be able to upgrade to 8 with around 30$ and the core/motherboard will be good for another 5 years if i don't want to play games on the highest settings.

Now add to that the fact that I can sell the graphics card second-hand and I can buy a new one for around 200$ ( and it will likely work for, once again, 4-6 years considering graphics advance at the same paste ), and the second hand will get you 25-50$ as well ( again, assuming the worst prices in 2-3 years, atm i could get roughly 60-70$ for it here ).

The problem is that most people ( I would assume you ) think that a PC needs to be "replaced" like a console, when in fact it doesn't... a PC can be upgraded here and there and it will run games at console quality or above for cheaper, simple as that, the core/motherboard/Hard/Power source are not in any way needed if you plan on playing video games, they can be used for a good 4 to 9 years.

Indeed my "older" PC that i bought in 2004 is now running with the only upgrade being a piece of RAM and I can run Dragon age Origins, all but the last hitman, Starcraft 2, BLR and Skyrim on it if i set them to low ( you can sometime set to medium + but not everything, things like shadow dynamics and so are best left at the lowest ), I will admit i don't know how the cost would translate in current day money because it was 8 freaking years ago, but I would say it was surely lower than 700$.

So yes, if you look at it from a very nit picky standpoint a PC will set you back maybe 100 up to 300$ more than an XBOX... but you own a PC anyway and that will still cost you around 150$ at best.

Now add to that:

-more control options on PC

-you can pirate games on PC without buying a 2nd PC

-you get more patches on PC

-you can chose to give all money to the devs on PC and not 20% cut to MS or Sony

-you can buy PC components 2nd hand and cut the cost down bellow what i said with about 20% give or take

-you have more games on PC

-you need only atl/tab to brows the internet

-you can chat with your friend via mic without paying for a subscription

Im sorry, but a PC is the best money for value choice out there, not a "gaming PC"... that's something people with good jobs that don't give a shit about throwing 1500$ away can talk and spoiled kids can dream/ask for, but the notion that a PC that runs games is a expensive PC is a misled one that was somehow spread by people who don't know what is required to run a game on a PC.

Avatar image for superfriend
superfriend

1786

Forum Posts

10

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#56  Edited By superfriend

@Aterons said:

i bought my PC mid 2009 for what would translate roughly at 450$ and I still run all games single player on max setting with reasonable fps and no stuttering/screen tearing unless something else i going on.

I... think you´re overselling your PC a wee tiny little bit here. BF3 on the highest settings is rough and don´t even get me started on FarCry 3. There are games out there that will absolutely kill anything that was out in 2009. Some of them are kinda bad ports, but still- there´s a lot of real good looking stuff out there.

But overall, yeah.. a PC is fine if you´re not constantly feeling the itch to upgrade it. With the super low prices on Steam and GMG you definitely save some amount of money compared to paying 60 (or more) bucks for console games.

Avatar image for colourful_hippie
colourful_hippie

6335

Forum Posts

8

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

#57  Edited By colourful_hippie

@Aterons: I couldn't agree more but it also comes down to how lazy you are. Most people don't want to think beyond plugging in a console, throwing in the disc, and done. I used to be like that but my priorities have since shifted to wanting more and being in a small apartment while going to college means that having a top PC that does everything is my best option.

Avatar image for andorski
Andorski

5482

Forum Posts

2310

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

#58  Edited By Andorski

@Colourful_Hippie said:

@PandaBear: But McShea wrote. I gotta find something redeeming in the guy and I just did despite how little that facet is.

If you don't like the guy, then you should be dismissive of such a pointless article. It's equal parts pandering and blatantly obvious. XBL Gold is a rip-off?! He must have put his nose to the grinder and dug deep in investigating such a claim. I honestly hope that his revelation of Gold being an overcharging fee was merely a creative way to open his article rather a genuine thought he came up upon recently. Since day one, Microsoft's Gold service has been a scheme to lock multiplayer gaming - which has been free* on other platforms - behind a paywall that is just cheap enough for the average consumer to go and say "fuck it, I'm not breaking the bank to pay for it."

The actual truth - which is completely missed by Mc Shea's article - is that despite how much a theft XBL Gold is, most people do not care. Other than those console fanboys bickering on Gamespot's System Wars forum, no one is going to stand up for Microsoft's online service. Those above the age of 13 know that MS is charging for LIVE simply because "people will actually pay for it." And so what? People buy dollar coffee at Starbucks for $4.25 USD. A fast food burger is around $3-4, and it's basically inedible poison. People spend a premium on shit they shouldn't even pay for all the time. Good on Microsoft for carving out this audience that they can charge on a monthly/yearly basis and get a consistent influx of cash. That's just good savvy business practice on their part. Trying to beat this drum of consumer thievery is useless because said consumer base knows this and has already come to the conclusion of not giving a shit.

Avatar image for toowalrus
toowalrus

13408

Forum Posts

29

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

#59  Edited By toowalrus

@Colourful_Hippie: When I read the title of this thread, I thought it said "A McShea Article that doesn't make me McSigh..."

Now I'm disappointed.

Avatar image for colourful_hippie
colourful_hippie

6335

Forum Posts

8

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

#60  Edited By colourful_hippie

@Andorski: That's because people have become complacent with their aging hardware. This generation is old as shit, once the new one comes around I bet people will be more price conscious and begin to have an issue with paying so much for Gold if they are already having to pay a large sum up front for the new hardware.

@TooWalrus said:

@Colourful_Hippie: When I read the title of this thread, I thought it said "A McShea Article that doesn't make me McSigh..."

Now I'm disappointed.

I won't lie, I thought about it...but the whole title wouldn't have fit.

Avatar image for pandabear
PandaBear

1484

Forum Posts

238

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#61  Edited By PandaBear

@Andorski said:

@Colourful_Hippie said:

@PandaBear: But McShea wrote. I gotta find something redeeming in the guy and I just did despite how little that facet is.

If you don't like the guy, then you should be dismissive of such a pointless article. It's equal parts pandering and blatantly obvious. XBL Gold is a rip-off?! He must have put his nose to the grinder and dug deep in investigating such a claim. I honestly hope that his revelation of Gold being an overcharging fee was merely a creative way to open his article rather a genuine thought he came up upon recently. Since day one, Microsoft's Gold service has been a scheme to lock multiplayer gaming - which has been free* on other platforms - behind a paywall that is just cheap enough for the average consumer to go and say "fuck it, I'm not breaking the bank to pay for it."

The actual truth - which is completely missed by Mc Shea's article - is that despite how much a theft XBL Gold is, most people do not care. Other than those console fanboys bickering on Gamespot's System Wars forum, no one is going to stand up for Microsoft's online service. Those above the age of 13 know that MS is charging for LIVE simply because "people will actually pay for it." And so what? People buy dollar coffee at Starbucks for $4.25 USD. A fast food burger is around $3-4, and it's basically inedible poison. People spend a premium on shit they shouldn't even pay for all the time. Good on Microsoft for carving out this audience that they can charge on a monthly/yearly basis and get a consistent influx of cash. That's just good savvy business practice on their part. Trying to beat this drum of consumer thievery is useless because said consumer base knows this and has already come to the conclusion of not giving a shit.

For the record that's not my quote. Thanks

On a side note the media should champion causes like this in all areas - movies, games, cars, the Internet, fresh produce, building costs, etc. They shouldn't be so reactive as to wait for outcry to be deafening then react. But at the same time this article is redundant. It's not a call to arms or even a good critical or financial analysis. It read like a fanboy rant. There's enough of that on the net already. How about a cost breakdown of licencing costs? Network costs? Infrastructure expansion and maintenance fees? There's none of that.

Avatar image for colourful_hippie
colourful_hippie

6335

Forum Posts

8

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

#62  Edited By colourful_hippie

@PandaBear: Of course that isn't your quote because there isn't anything in there that you wrote. He was quoting me.

Avatar image for legion_
Legion_

1717

Forum Posts

132

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#63  Edited By Legion_

I like Gold, it feels solid. I don't like Plus, it feels cheap.

Avatar image for thesoutherndandy
TheSouthernDandy

4157

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#64  Edited By TheSouthernDandy

Seems like the only time people write about Xbox Live is to complain about it, myself included. Pretty much agree with where the article is going, aside from Halo and liking that controller, there's not much keeping me on the Xbox. PS+ offers a lot of pretty attractive stuff compared to Live. The slow updates and downloads sound super infuriating but aside from that, I dunno unless something significant changes with the next generation I'm seriously considering going with Sony.

Avatar image for colourful_hippie
colourful_hippie

6335

Forum Posts

8

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

#65  Edited By colourful_hippie

@Legion_ said:

I like Gold, it feels solid. I don't like Plus, it feels cheap.

You're talking about network infrastructures, not services.

@TheSouthernDandy said:

Seems like the only time people write about Xbox Live is to complain about it, myself included. Pretty much agree with where the article is going, aside from Halo and liking that controller, there's not much keeping me on the Xbox. PS+ offers a lot of pretty attractive stuff compared to Live. The slow updates and downloads sound super infuriating but aside from that, I dunno unless something significant changes with the next generation I'm seriously considering going with Sony.

Sony really has a chance to knock it out of the park and they need to anyways if their stock situation is any indication. They paid dearly for their hubris at the start of this generation, hopefully they will put out a solid online network that can stand out. There's a chance MS might pull a Sony and be cocky at launch. On the games side all they have is Halo and Fable(?) oh and Forza I guess. Gears for me has peaked with 3 and they would have to either buy out franchise or pay Epic enough to do more. Hopefully they got some new IP's under their sleeve cuz I don't have any interest in getting that console when I have a PC.

Avatar image for legion_
Legion_

1717

Forum Posts

132

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#66  Edited By Legion_

@Colourful_Hippie: So? Gold feels like a service I would pay money for, and Plus does not. Easy as that.

Avatar image for thesoutherndandy
TheSouthernDandy

4157

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#67  Edited By TheSouthernDandy

@Colourful_Hippie said:

@TheSouthernDandy said:

Seems like the only time people write about Xbox Live is to complain about it, myself included. Pretty much agree with where the article is going, aside from Halo and liking that controller, there's not much keeping me on the Xbox. PS+ offers a lot of pretty attractive stuff compared to Live. The slow updates and downloads sound super infuriating but aside from that, I dunno unless something significant changes with the next generation I'm seriously considering going with Sony.

Sony really has a chance to knock it out of the park and they need to anyways if their stock situation is any indication. They paid dearly for their hubris at the start of this generation, hopefully they will put out a solid online network that can stand out. There's a chance MS might pull a Sony and be cocky at launch. On the games side all they have is Halo and Fable(?) oh and Forza I guess. Gears for me has peaked with 3 and they would have to either buy out franchise or pay Epic enough to do more. Hopefully they got some new IP's under their sleeve cuz I don't have any interest in getting that console when I have a PC.

Yeah I'm in the same boat. I really like Gears but I wouldn't be upset with not being able to play the next one. Basically Halo and Alan Wake, if the sequel ever comes out, are what would keep me around but Alan Wake is probably gonna be on the PC anyway and Halo isn't reason enough to put up with the BS that comes with the console. I hope MS reinvents how the service works but when they're pulling in the cash they're getting off of CoD and Halo players alone, I don't see them doing it. I can't even say I blame them for not wanting to, from a business perspective, why would you want to get rid of that cash flow? For me though, it's not worth it to pay for it even though I still am. Add to that the free games, discounts and day one downloads you get with PS+ and getting used to that Dual Shock seems like a no brainer.

Avatar image for colourful_hippie
colourful_hippie

6335

Forum Posts

8

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

#68  Edited By colourful_hippie

@Legion_: You're still talking about infrastructures here, I think you're missing something. They both "feel" the same free or not.

Avatar image for legion_
Legion_

1717

Forum Posts

132

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#69  Edited By Legion_

@Colourful_Hippie: I disagree. Right now I'm paying for both. Sure, you get a solid deal from Sony, but the fact that they've yet to build a working store is insane. And that's why I have no problem paying for Live. I feel I'm paying for quality, while Plus just feels like I'm donating money to Sony.

Avatar image for re_player1
RE_Player1

8074

Forum Posts

1047

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#70  Edited By RE_Player1

@Colourful_Hippie: I too think Microsoft is going to be cocky at the launch of their next console. They went from the bottom in the PS2 and Xbox days to the top and these past few years you can see their desire for fresh new IPs is gone in favor of getting exclusive dlc deals or just being happy with moving more third party units when compared to Sony. I can see them continuing this Gold membership bullshit and getting too invested in whatever the Kinect successor will be. I hope Sony is more successful next generation as you can see the stumbling of the initial PS3 years has humbled them in a way, at least that's what I get from their general presence with services like Plus, day 1 digital releases for consoles, supporting indie or niche games etc.

Avatar image for colourful_hippie
colourful_hippie

6335

Forum Posts

8

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

#71  Edited By colourful_hippie

@Legion_ said:

@Colourful_Hippie: I disagree. Right now I'm paying for both. Sure, you get a solid deal from Sony, but the fact that they've yet to build a working store is insane. And that's why I have no problem paying for Live. I feel I'm paying for quality, while Plus just feels like I'm donating money to Sony.

You misread me, when I say both I mean Sony and MS's networks feel the same if you're paying in for their premium service or not. Like I can not pay for XBL and it's network still feels same as premium unless of course I'm paying for the multiplayer which at this stage isn't much of a selling point when multiplayer on PS3 has reached a level of being fine as well.

@msavo: Yeah they really stepped it up in the last years of this cycle. If they get their act together with the next console's network then that will end up being my first new console. I can at least count on them for multiple good exclusives.

Avatar image for legion_
Legion_

1717

Forum Posts

132

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#72  Edited By Legion_

@Colourful_Hippie: I don't know how I can get much clearer. Live feels solid, Plus does not. I'm okay with paying for Live, because it's a better service. It's like the iPhone vs. Android. Let's just say I'm a iPhone guy.

Avatar image for colourful_hippie
colourful_hippie

6335

Forum Posts

8

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

#73  Edited By colourful_hippie

@Legion_: Plus is only a premium service that offers benefits. What you're talking about is PSN, not Plus. Same goes for Live. If you didn't get that from my last post then I'm just going to stop right there. And you're phone OS analogy doesn't work when once again you're talking about infrastructures not services.

Avatar image for legion_
Legion_

1717

Forum Posts

132

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#74  Edited By Legion_

@Colourful_Hippie: I disagree. And I don't like how you decide what I'm saying and not saying. Makes you look like a jerk. What I am saying is that if I'm supporting Live and maintaining it's high quality by paying for online services, then I'll gladly do so. For Plus however, I feel it's just a way to donate moeny to Sony. I don't feel there's any quality there. And my iPhone analogy does work, because it is a analogy. Easy as that. I could say that Live feels like a Ferrari, while Plus feels like a Volvo, and that still works.

Avatar image for funkasaurasrex
FunkasaurasRex

854

Forum Posts

84

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#75  Edited By FunkasaurasRex

@Legion_ said:

I like Gold, it feels solid. I don't like Plus, it feels cheap.

That's kind of an absurd argument. The problem with Live is that you're paying a premium price for somewhat better refined features Microsoft's competitors offer standard. It's especially ridiculous given that they want to sell the Xbox as a media hub to users.

Avatar image for colourful_hippie
colourful_hippie

6335

Forum Posts

8

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

#76  Edited By colourful_hippie

@Legion_ said:

@Colourful_Hippie: I disagree. And I don't like how you decide what I'm saying and not saying. Makes you look like a jerk. What I am saying is that if I'm supporting Live and maintaining it's high quality by paying for online services, then I'll gladly do so. For Plus however, I feel it's just a way to donate moeny to Sony. I don't feel there's any quality there. And my iPhone analogy does work, because it is a analogy. Easy as that. I could say that Live feels like a Ferrari, while Plus feels like a Volvo, and that still works.

That's the one thing that actually sounds right, the rest is right back to what I've been saying all the time. You're analogies are terrible in that they are not saying what you think they are saying. Done.

Avatar image for legion_
Legion_

1717

Forum Posts

132

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#77  Edited By Legion_

@Colourful_Hippie: They're saying exactly what I mean them to say. Sorry if you can't comprehend that :/

Avatar image for colourful_hippie
colourful_hippie

6335

Forum Posts

8

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

#78  Edited By colourful_hippie

@Legion_: Oh boy, whatever you say guy. I just like how you keep talking about Plus as someone would of PSN, but sure have it your way.

Avatar image for legion_
Legion_

1717

Forum Posts

132

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#79  Edited By Legion_

@Colourful_Hippie: Sorry to see that you can't understand that their ultimatily depended on each other.

Avatar image for gerhabio
Gerhabio

1996

Forum Posts

29

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 8

#80  Edited By Gerhabio

I cancelled my subscription about 3 months ago. I was playing ME3 multiplayer and summoning fools to help me out in Dark Souls. Right after that, I realized I didn't want to play multiplayer for anything anymore and that I did not make use of any of the "perks" Gold offers. I have never (EVER) bought anything that was discounted for Gold members, I have never won any of their sweepstakes, and I don't use Netflix or Hulu on my TV anymore.

It is simply too expensive. My next console choice will pretty much be dictated by who can give me the best online value. Right now, it seems Sony's where it's at.

Avatar image for colourful_hippie
colourful_hippie

6335

Forum Posts

8

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

#81  Edited By colourful_hippie

@Gerhabio said:

It is simply too expensive. My next console choice will pretty much be dictated by who can give me the best online value. Right now, it seems Sony's where it's at.

If MS moved multiplayer out from the paywall next gen then they would be well on their way to hopefully making a Gold service worth paying for. Their service was worth it in the beginning because the network backed it up but now that Sony's multiplayer is up to snuff and still free MS's Gold just looks archaic and a robbery especially with the great deals you get with PSN's Plus.

Avatar image for bemusedchunk
bemusedchunk

912

Forum Posts

1

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

#82  Edited By bemusedchunk

Xbox Live can easily be fixed - by just taking a page out of PS+.

Offer "Silver" as a way to get online for free, but give special perks for Gold members, such as deals/discounts, access to early betas/demos, special "Gold Only" events, and throw a slew of Retail/Arcade games for that month/quarter/whatever.

I sold my PS3 to my roommate but ended up jumping on PS+ just for my Vita and am I pleasantly surprised.

Downloading a ton of games that I had completely forgotten about on both the Vita and the PS3.

But Microsoft will never change.

As long as people are paying for Gold - and boy are they - they will never stop charging.