#101 Edited by iceman228433 (616 posts) -

I already have Playstation plus so I don't care but if it means that the ps4 online experience won't be such shit then I am all for this change.

#102 Edited by PhilESkyline (778 posts) -

@hockeyjohnston said:

@phileskyline said:

@hockeyjohnston said:

There is nothing that needed improvement about the PS3's online play from my perspective. Certainly nothing I'd be willing to pay for.

PS+ is nice, but I'm not buying a box that essentially makes it mandatory (for my purposes). No PS4 or XBox1 for me -- that's not what I'd have expected going into this week, but that's what's happened.

Console gaming is not for you then.

That's certainly the message I've gotten. Bummer, though, as I've played everything from the Atari 2600 on.

Atari 2600 was my first gaming machine as well but this is the evolution of the industry. Thankfully Sony is doing it's best to keep the gamer happy in regards to value and flexibility. I don't have $1,000 to drop on both consoles but in the long run Sony will be the best money wise. MS has so many additional cost that doesn't meet me needs or interest.

If you have a gaming PC get with Steam, that's my wish.

#103 Posted by masterpaperlink (1842 posts) -

If PS plus was shit and didn't have any benefit to the consumer, you may have a sliver of an argument here. But PS Plus has added benefits, like free games and price drops. So as long as that continues, I'm willing to participate.

Ps+ is so great because its not mandatory, the only reason someone would sign up for it is to get free games and crazy deals, that is currently the crux of the service. They had to work to make it appealing or else it would be laughed off as a money grab. Now, what happens when the majority of people paying for a service are doing so only because they have to in order to play online? The pressure to give this additive service is no longer there, what do they have to justify? your paying now whether you like it or not.

maybe i am a cynic but sony likes money and needlessly giving away free games ≠ money. Great service now? sure, couple years down the line? not so sure

i hope your right though.

#104 Edited by SpaceInsomniac (3728 posts) -

@tycobb said:

Do you not know how smart this is? This is one of the best moves Sony could have done business wise during last nights all out brawl. Not because they now have a small revenue stream coming in constantly, but because now people have to think twice before even considering picking up a second console. Who wants to be paying for 2 online services?

Even I who does not pay attention to game spending is even reconsidering picking up both consoles now. I am fine with paying to play online, but doubling that cost because I now have 2 consoles is a real deterrent when even contemplating that 2nd console purchase.

This is actually a VERY good point.

It's also rather sad that only the OP has stepped up and said that they'd be fine with paying for online, if Sony ended up paying for dedicated servers. Everyone else is clinging to the same "you're paying for peer to peer" arguments that they've been using for years.

#106 Edited by GaspoweR (3026 posts) -

By the way guys, the author of this post just joined Giant Bomb today (June 11). I'm not sure if he/she is just here in order to bring more people into their campaign and making accounts on sites just to gain more support so I urge you duders to just be cautious cause this just sounds like propaganda and the OP just created an account in order to further his/her agenda.


#107 Edited by ez123 (1965 posts) -

@joshs said:

You will get 12 free games for the price of one, every year. Shut the fuck up. PS+ is worth the money today, even without it being required to play online.

I think this constitutes being a jerk.

It's a new generation, alright.

#109 Edited by Rolyatkcinmai (2687 posts) -

Jesus Christ, get a friggin' job you lazy goons.

#110 Posted by President_Barackbar (3462 posts) -

I don't think its unreasonable for people to wonder why Sony has dropped their free online gaming policy. On the other hand, until they actually EXPLAIN why they felt the need to start charging, I don't really think its worth getting upset over. If Sony decided to start charging so they could actually make online play on PSN decent (its always felt mediocre to bad on PS3 to me), then I'm ok with that. We can't just assume its a naked cash grab until we KNOW its a naked cash grab.

#111 Edited by tonyp2121 (169 posts) -

I pay $5 a month to see subscriber videos and support Giant Bomb, I don't see how $5 a month for free games and online play is too much to ask for. Hell, coming in from Xbox Live, PS+ will be more than welcome.

#112 Edited by ThePickle (4182 posts) -

@big_jon said:

Is this a joke?

No. This is the internet where asking someone to pay for something is a great insult and requires a Twitter campaign.

I love going through this thread and seeing people with membership icons complaining. People $50 a year for videos of guys playing videogames scoff at the idea of paying the exact same price to play games online (and get free fucking games), like they've probably been doing since 2005.

#113 Edited by SpaceInsomniac (3728 posts) -

@tonyp2121 said:

I pay $5 a month to see subscriber videos and support Giant Bomb, I don't see how $5 a month for free games and online play is too much to ask for. Hell, coming in from Xbox Live, PS+ will be more than welcome.

Those Giant Bomb videos should be FREE! It doesn't cost them anything to just hit record on a camera and play some video games! Why should I pay for videos when I can get them on You Tube for free? How dare they steal from me!

Am I doing it right? Yeah, that's how some of you people sound to me. Try not to take too much offense, and please give Sony the benefit of the doubt until we hear if they'll be spending money on loads of dedicated servers.

#114 Posted by HockeyJohnston (71 posts) -

There's nothing the least bit weird about someone who might pay for one kind of content (high quality writing/video about your hobby) and be mad about another (connecting to people on the internet to play a game).

Apples and oranges.

#115 Posted by ZeForgotten (10397 posts) -

@big_jon said:

Is this a joke?

No. This is the internet where asking someone to pay for something is a great insult and requires a Twitter campaign.

I love going through this thread and seeing people with membership icons complaining. People $50 a year for videos of guys playing videogames scoff at the idea of paying the exact same price to play games online (and get free fucking games), like they've probably been doing since 2005.

That's mostly what I'm laughing at too.

#116 Edited by Solh0und (1773 posts) -

I'm fine with paying for online play. If this was 2003 however.....

#117 Posted by yyZiggurat (1016 posts) -

@tonyp2121 said:

I pay $5 a month to see subscriber videos and support Giant Bomb, I don't see how $5 a month for free games and online play is too much to ask for. Hell, coming in from Xbox Live, PS+ will be more than welcome.

Those Giant Bomb videos should be FREE! It doesn't cost them anything to just hit record on a camera play some video games! Why should I pay for videos when I can get them on You Tube for free? How dare they steal from me!

Am I doing it right? Yeah, that's how some of you people sound to me. Try not to take too much offense, and please give Sony the benefit of the doubt until we hear if they'll be spending money on loads of dedicated servers.

You so and so. I was thinking of a way to reply to that before I finished reading your post. Nice job.

#118 Posted by Nilhelm (28 posts) -

Servers costs money.

Sony has probably been regretting for years for not going paid online when the PS3 came out. They didn't know how big the console online scene would become and who knows how much they much have been spending on servers and whatnot.

I'll will gladly continue to pay for PS+ and it wont be so I can play online

#119 Edited by mrfluke (5152 posts) -

@noobsauceg7 said:

I will happily pay for online pay. I got what I wanted with no DRM so no thank you.

yea that and no online check ins, im good with 5 bucks a month, sony has to get something back for giving us used games and no online check in, and if this will make them good money then by all means.

seriously you people are gonna be complaining about this now that we got what we wanted? the dumb fucks need to get their head out of their ass

, if u dont like it then buy a fucking pc and enjoy no used games/rentals

and i was just about to say i was proud of the online community and their readiness to fight,

#120 Edited by Angouri (231 posts) -

@mister_v said:

JUST PAY THE MONEY AND ENJOY FREE GAMES!!!!!

The nerve of some people.

I'm just wondering if you notice the contradiction in saying to "pay" for "free."

I hope Sony improves its multiplayer. I never played much, but I would be glad if the money I give them for plus fixes the pain it was to play games like RE5 and ME3 online with friends. Sorry, but MSFT did do that better.

#121 Posted by Dot (163 posts) -

@big_jon said:

Is this a joke?

He quoted Wikipedia... It HAS to be.... Right? *gulp* o.o

#122 Edited by NoobSauceG7 (1247 posts) -

@mrfluke said:

@noobsauceg7 said:

I will happily pay for online pay. I got what I wanted with no DRM so no thank you.

yea that and no online check ins, im good with 5 bucks a month, sony has to get something back for giving us used games and no online check in, and if this will make them good money then by all means.

seriously you people are gonna be complaining about this now that we got what we wanted? the dumb fucks need to get their head out of their ass

, if u dont like it then buy a fucking pc and enjoy no used games/rentals

and i was just about to say i was proud of the online community and their readiness to fight,

Exactly. Like the current XBL Gold is that price and PSPlus offers so much more.

#123 Edited by bebopfox (3 posts) -

Pay to play online shouldn't be enforced. Make it a per-game payment if needed. By this I mean the following: If a game uses dedicated servers, require psn+ for that game. I don't see where people get off by telling others that they need to "shut the fuck up" or "stop being lazy and get a job" when all we are doing is raising a complaint about a monetary change in their marketing system. Online play has been free since 1990's, what magically happened from then that required us to pay twice for online gaming (especially in peer2peer environments). I could care less about the "free" games or whatever other "bonuses" there are, but when I buy a system that offers the ability to play online, I don't want to have to take into consideration that this is another payment I have to dish out for a game I've already purchased on a system I've already purchased using an ISP that I am already paying for. The worst offender is that Nintendo could have garnered some press/support by reinstating the fact that never had any policy regarding the inability to play used games and their system does not require an additional fee to play online. Unfortunately, Nintendo doesn't seem to be right in the head....

#125 Edited by Kidavenger (3548 posts) -

I'm conflicted on this, live gold is the main reason I dislike xbox, yet I've been a PS+ sub for over a year now and I think it's great. 99% of the games I play are single player and anything I'd ever get into multiplayer wise would be on PC which can maintain a proper online community for games that deserve it. I guess if this makes PSN multiplayer better and has no negative regarding what they are already doing it's good news if not a little dirty.

Online
#126 Posted by shinjin977 (759 posts) -

You give people something they have asked for and people ask for more. You give them that and they ask for more. You give them even that people say you con them. Come on guys, its great people want to be heard and I fully support this campaign or any other people want to do but there is a point when even billion dollar company Sony need to start making money too. They cant take a lost forever.

#127 Posted by mrfluke (5152 posts) -

@mrfluke said:

@noobsauceg7 said:

I will happily pay for online pay. I got what I wanted with no DRM so no thank you.

yea that and no online check ins, im good with 5 bucks a month, sony has to get something back for giving us used games and no online check in, and if this will make them good money then by all means.

seriously you people are gonna be complaining about this now that we got what we wanted? the dumb fucks need to get their head out of their ass

, if u dont like it then buy a fucking pc and enjoy no used games/rentals

and i was just about to say i was proud of the online community and their readiness to fight,

Exactly. Like the current XBL Gold is that price and PSPlus offers so much more.

yea, you get free games i think weekly, and you do get game discounts as well,

goddamn i wish i didn't see this thread, i HATE using the word entitled/entitlement. but if people are complaining about this?

they feel that they are too fucking entitled, they need to get their head out of their ass and realize that sony needs to directly make back some money in exchange for giving what us console gamers wanted.

#128 Posted by NoobSauceG7 (1247 posts) -

@mrfluke: Yea, it's like you are paying for a service. It costs money to run servers and all the bonuses make it worth it especially compared to Microsoft playing catch up now with Xbox Gold. And it's really not that much money, just the cost of one game a year, and you will probably be able to get prepaid cards cheap like you can with Xbox gold since it is sometimes $35 at Amazon or someplace. No reason to complain

#129 Edited by rebgav (1429 posts) -

I don't think that Playstation should put online functionality of any sort behind the paywall.

However, I've been hanging out behind their paywall for nearly a year now and it's pretty sweet back there, you guys. I paid like $50 bucks for the year and received a couple of hundred bucks in free games and a 90% ($108.00) discount on a year of their music streaming service. There are worse places to be.

Edit: I just remembered that I have to re-up on my PS+ sub. Thanks, Giant Bomb.

#130 Posted by TurboMan (7540 posts) -

If you have a PS and don't already have PS+, you're an insane person that's losing out already.

I don't think there's one person on the planet that has PS+ that is bitter about it.

Online
#131 Edited by bebopfox (3 posts) -

Nobody is saying they are entitled to free games or other things ps+ brings to the table. We just want the OPTION to pay for the extras or be able to continue to play online freely (like we have been able to for years).

Do you know how much it costs for one machine to connect to another machines IP address? Nothing. If this was for dedicated servers and all games used that, sure, but the basic online model for console online games has almost always been peer2peer.

#132 Edited by Milkman (16788 posts) -

They give you people an inch and you take a mile.

Online
#133 Posted by Ninja_Welshman (485 posts) -

No problem with them charging for online. Yes I am a + subscriber but I love it and have never regretted it.

#134 Posted by bebopfox (3 posts) -

@milkman: the inch being online play? this inch has been around since the 90's. how is maintaining something that has been a staple in online gaming "taking a mile"?

#135 Posted by mrfluke (5152 posts) -

@milkman said:

They give you people an inch and you take a mile.

i actually agree with you 10000000%.

really hope this "movement" doesnt take off, i can already see the articles now

#136 Posted by Milkman (16788 posts) -

@bebopfox said:

@milkman: the inch being online play? this inch has been around since the 90's. how is maintaining something that has been a staple in online gaming "taking a mile"?

Besides the fact that you get a TON of shit with your PlayStation Plus subscription and it's just a good deal in general, Microsoft has been charging for online play (and Netflix and a whole bunch of other shit that Sony won't) for like six years. They one upped the Xbox One in literally every department so they can get away with charging for this. I would prefer not to pay for it too but I don't think it's that big of deal and certainly not something to start a hashtag petition or whatever over.

Online
#137 Edited by SpaceInsomniac (3728 posts) -

@milkman said:

They give you people an inch and you take a mile.

I think it's more like "they give you people a mile, and you still complain about an inch."

Seriously, almost no one expected Sony to go as pro-consumer as they did last night, and they did it anyway. But they have to make money somehow, and the dedicated servers that will likely be a big part of the next generation aren't going to be free.

#138 Posted by MetalGearSunny (6992 posts) -

Oh my fucking god. Is this really a thing? This is the dumbest thing to get up in arms over.

You know how people pay for XBL Gold right now? It'll be like that, except there seems to be a lot more value. On top of online play, you get access to free games. Also, you don't have to pay to have access to media apps like you do on 360. With that in mind, I really don't see what the big deal is about. With that ballsy stuff their pulling, they're probably taking a loss, and need more sources of income.

#139 Edited by Shortbreadtom (778 posts) -

PS+ is great value, and if it keeps the online play reserved for people who obviously care more about games then online games are more fun, no?

Also, a twitter campaign will do dick all. This was an E3 bullet point, livestreamed to millions of people and is a policy from the higher-ups at a huge company. A thing like the Dark Souls twitter campaign is so different from this situation.

#GimmeGimmeSony

Online
#140 Posted by project343 (2825 posts) -

If they have to take on this monthly fee to beef up their online infrastructure to acceptable standards (because, lets face it, the PS3's infrastructure is unforgivable)... then so be it. It's a worthy trade.

#141 Edited by ChoboBot (155 posts) -

I am more happy that they haven't put the other 3rd party services behind the paywall, even though I don't use stuff like Twitter or Facebook on PS3, it would suck for a Netflix user to have to pay for access and then the monthly subscription.

#142 Posted by Blackbear (20 posts) -

Sony is a company, and that company has to make money. I was shocked and very happy to learn that they are not implementing DRM into the machine. Sony listens to their consumer base, and this was made very clear with their decision to not include DRM or "always online" connectivity. That being said, they are still a company and they need to make money somehow. There needs to be a compromise on both ends (consumer and sony). I feel that the consumer is benefiting immensely from this arrangement. I understand some people are not interested in the "Free" games and other services such as cross game voice chat, and are offended by sony's move towards PS plus. This however is Sony trying to show some good faith and listen to the consumer by supporting used games. In the end, this is a business and businesses have to be profitable. There is a thin line between standing up for what you think is right and getting a tiny bit too greedy. Im not knocking on anyone, because everyone is entitled to their own opinion. I just want to put my two pennies out there.

#143 Edited by masterpaperlink (1842 posts) -

@milkman said:

They give you people an inch and you take a mile.

I think it's more like "they give you people a mile, and you still complain about an inch."

Seriously, almost no one expected Sony to do as pro-consumer as they did last night, and they did it anyway. But they have to make money somehow, and the dedicated servers that will likely be a big part of the next generation aren't going to be free.

I think its more like "they take away an inch and you ask for it back"

I am surprised how much i disagree with everyone, you're all crazy people. this thread is making me sad i think ill stop reading it.

#144 Posted by rachelepithet (1391 posts) -

I thought this was a terrible move by Sony. Of course I would buy PS+ anyway, but not for every member of the family, or not for a secondary account I make to get around games restricted to Canada or something (like 1 vs 100 on Xbox). Finally, it means that, just like Halo 2 on Xbox Live, once PS5 comes out, all of your PS4 games will never be playable online ever again, even if you have PS+ on PS5. That blows.

#145 Edited by Yodasdarkside (276 posts) -

Wrapping it up with Plus is the sensible thing to do. Plus already represents such staggering value that it's not even funny. If you're a new PS3 owner, you can either fork out another $60 with your purchase and play one game, or $50 and have nine of them ready to download immediately you set up your system. And the nine will change over the course of the year. Add in cloud saves and automatic updates and it's a no-brainer. Especially next to Microsoft, where online play is ALL you get.

#146 Edited by BoFooQ (674 posts) -

I love plus! used free month or 3 month trial when it came out and have bought 2 years since cause its best thing ever. I have a back log of games just stacked in my PS3 now.

sleeping dogs, xcom, deus ex,and lots of smaller games that are fun to play at times.

#147 Posted by Floope (190 posts) -

people these days.

#148 Posted by bobafettjm (1487 posts) -

I thought this was a terrible move by Sony. Of course I would buy PS+ anyway, but not for every member of the family, or not for a secondary account I make to get around games restricted to Canada or something (like 1 vs 100 on Xbox). Finally, it means that, just like Halo 2 on Xbox Live, once PS5 comes out, all of your PS4 games will never be playable online ever again, even if you have PS+ on PS5. That blows.

PS+ has nothing to do with being able to play these games online once the PS5 comes out, that has to do with PSN in general whether it be free or paid.

Also, you only need one PS+ account and the rest of the family can also use it.

#149 Edited by mikey87144 (1774 posts) -

They've been losing money on PSN since launch. Home did not offset the cost like they hoped it would.

#150 Posted by GreggD (4505 posts) -

PC gamers complain about EVERYTHING. I'm surprised they even have time to play games at all.

Way to generalize.