So is $60 a year worth it for online? That's, again, for the consumer to decide. If he's paying the $60 for Plus because online play is so important than the quality of the monthly "free" games is irrelevant.
It's 50 a year, not 60. And people paying attention generally can get it from $30-40.
Even at $50, we're talking $4 a month... an amount many people drop at a coffeeshop without even blinking.
For that $4, we get online, sure, but also 6 games. It's a fantastic value. Even if you hate every other month, it's still a fantastic value. It only takes one game you really wanted and had planned to buy (at, say, $15 value) to 'pay' for almost 4 months. Plus you get to try out 23 other games during that period, and might actually discover you like some of them. And if you buy it at $30 on sale? Two fucking games a year that rock your world (say, binding of isaac, or resogun, or yakuza if that's your thing) justify the whole year. Everything else? Bonus.
Hell, even if you value 'good' games at a paltry $3 'rental', you only need 10 to 16 games out of 72 per year to qualify as 'good' to justify it.
That doesn't include money saved on discounts and other perks.
People bitch and moan about the 6 games that are coming out this month... while anyone with an annual sub probably has a backlog of dozens (upon dozens) of previous ps+ games they haven't had a chance to get to yet.
Ridiculous value for our gaming dollar, and it is borderline hysterical watching some act like sony is ripping them off.