I'm wondering if the reason is cause microsoft now has the ad rights to the assassins Creed series.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
PS4 PS+ games have disappointed me for almost 2 years
- Thread starter Fonds
- Start date
I'm wondering if the reason is cause microsoft now has the ad rights to the assassins Creed series.
BennyBlanco
aka IMurRIVAL69
Yeah, the only one I've played for more than 10 mins is Rocket League. It was a great service on ps3 and Vita and went to shit the second it became required for online multiplayer. So much humble bundle fodder pixel art crap.
Well you can't account for your bad taste OP, They have been consistently great games on PS+
Yes it's not full price retail games every month but I have been happy with the quality of titles we are getting on PS+
Yes it's not full price retail games every month but I have been happy with the quality of titles we are getting on PS+
You are really out to lunch.
Fair enough. Then we are in agreement that MS has been anti-consumer with their online service since 2005. Yet I never hear people complain about it. Sony has been charging for use of their online service for less than 2 years, and there are always people complaining. Bit of a double standard, no?
You have one hell of a filter.
My only disappointment with my PS Plus membership is disappointment in myself. I haven't had time to enjoy all the weird and wonderful games they've been offering.
I'm adding them to my library, but my PS Plus backlog is big enough to warrant a couple years more of PS Plus just to play those ones.
I'm adding them to my library, but my PS Plus backlog is big enough to warrant a couple years more of PS Plus just to play those ones.
Caayn
Member
You must have been off the internet from 2002 till the Sony E3 2013 press conference.
super-famicom
Member
Sorry you feel that way OP. While there have been a few PS+ games I have not been interested in, I am overall happy with the quality of the games in the IGC.
Ted
Member
My statement is still true. They are not new games. They are old games releasing on an additional platform.
Their value depends entirely on you and whether you have or haven't played them on other platforms but regardless, they are not (in the specific examples given) actually new games.
I'm not arguing these games aren't good, or in some cases even great. The fact people haven't seen these smaller games before but have seen the AAA blockbusters and therefore perceive the smaller games as having higher value based on that is fantastic and gives exposure to some games that really deserve it but the complete reverse can also be true.
For example, I had no interest in, or indeed any great knowledge of, Demon's Souls or the Uncharted series before they came to PS+ but I had played Fez to death in 2012 on a competing platform.
Self admittedly I assume I'm a much smaller section in the Venn diagram of PS players and their gaming tastes but given that like you I also pay for PS+ I feel I am just as eligible to comment on the perceived quality of that service as yourself. Just as any other customer or prospective customer of the service is. The fact that I also own and play on other platforms as well as PS4 shouldn't negate that. Or at least I don't think so.
I am definitely the latter and probably, given that I am lucky enough to live in an economically developed nation, the former as well. At least relatively speaking.
And, perhaps have a pre-GAF coffee.
and its not like the ps3 had some kind of amazing first 1.5-2 years either...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Instant_Game_Collection_games_(PAL_region)#PlayStation_Vita
It took 2 years before there was a steady stream of AAA games coming constantly.
June 2012.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Instant_Game_Collection_games_(PAL_region)#PlayStation_Vita
It took 2 years before there was a steady stream of AAA games coming constantly.
June 2012.
dave is ok
aztek is ok
This year would have been abysmal without Rocket League.
I am also disappointed by PS+ offerings. There have been quite a few indie gems. Rogue Legacy was great as is Rocket League and I am sure there are other, but most really great games they put on I already have bought because they were good. For example Transistor would be a good example of a great game that was released on PS+, but it was so good I got it day 1.
I am waiting for all those first party full release game that I may have neglected for some reason or another and would get the chance to play them. X1 got Tomb Raider this month, a game I never got to play, but seem really good and just in time for the sequel. The closest thing to this that Sony has done is Ground Zeroes.
I am waiting for all those first party full release game that I may have neglected for some reason or another and would get the chance to play them. X1 got Tomb Raider this month, a game I never got to play, but seem really good and just in time for the sequel. The closest thing to this that Sony has done is Ground Zeroes.
UpDownLeftRight
Banned
I think we're going to see a cycle here starting with this gen. Since last gen when PS+ came about we were already pretty far through the gen Sony could dig up a bunch of older retail games that made their way to digital as a means of boosting sales on old games. At the start of this gen and still partially now, we've been getting promising looking indies for free, sometimes from launch. I figure we're now reaching the point where we will start to see some of the launch window games make their way PS+ particularly in 2016 and that from there we will just follow the cycle.
I like the tapas approach that Sony has. I am much more likely to get a few games that tickle my tastebuds compared to if they do one or two big retail titles - in that situation I am likely to already have bought the game if I was interested, or I didn't want the game in the first place, in which case giving it to me for free is pointless.
Smaller titles let me try things I wouldn't normally, and occasionally you find some gems.
Smaller titles let me try things I wouldn't normally, and occasionally you find some gems.
J
Jotamide
Unconfirmed Member
Probably better than all of the PS4's AAA offerings but some people hate fun I guess.
Yes, but that was a (very public) relaunch of the service, because it was considered shit. It's not tied to the age of the platform, else from June 2012, we'd be seeing games exclusively launched prior to June 2010, which wasn't the case at all (not even for that first month).
binarymelon
Member
Not everyone has all 3 platforms. Probably a very large portion of PS4 users own neither a PS3 or a Vita.
I've enjoyed the smaller offerings on PS3 more and also the offerings on PS4.
So yeah that list of AAA titles largely does nothing for me.
AAA doesn't mean I'll automatically be grateful and love whatever tripe like Bioshock they give me.
But a better middle ground with more sprinklings of large games is necessary to placate the number of dissenting voices.
FinalStageBoss
Banned
I'd rather have the games I'm getting over old ass AAA titles tbh.
Binding of Isaac and Rocket League>Old stale aaa titles.
Binding of Isaac and Rocket League>Old stale aaa titles.
They are, at least in Europe anyway:
Tomb Raider: http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/gaming/...ail-through-gold-edition.html#~poVFH4XcAQgnDt
First Light: http://www.pushsquare.com/news/2014...s_first_light_fetches_european_retail_release
The original point was that the OP was complaining there have been no retail releases for the PS4 when there have been a few.
Do people really want Knack or Killzone that badly, why not just buy the game?
I got Killzone for £4, and I've seen Knack sub £5 multiple times.
Personally I like that the service introduces me to games I may not have played otherwise.
Exactly. When people go on about 'the first two years of PS+' it's like they're forgetting that it was largely agreed to be total shit and had tons of complaints. It was only when they went to the IGC format in mid 2012 and started adding AAA games that subscriptions took off and the service got the reputation for excellence that it ultimately would.
RichiRamjag
Member
You expected the same output of games from a fairly new console versus one that had been out for nearly ten years? The first year was barren of decent games for both consoles. I don't get the mentality tbh.
I've played more of these current games than I ever did back then with those AAAs.
I've played more of these current games than I ever did back then with those AAAs.
PeskyToaster
Member
I buy most of my AAA games at launch, the ones I want to play anyway so it doesn't really bother me. None of the indie games appeal to me but I'm really paying for MP access and everything else is just gravy.
KanameYuuki
Member
And where is this month's Vote to Play?
binarymelon
Member
That last part seems very dismissive. You have to at least admit you're not in the majority with your opinion on Bioshock. I agree with you, but it's an extremely popular title and often pointed to as one of the stand out PS+ titles. They just really need to broaden the tastes that they cater to on PS+.
Gravy Boat
Member
They didn't say it was happening every month
you're correct.
binarymelon
Member
visiblemode
Member
It's like most people have said...on PS3 it was easy, you could go years into the past and offer AAA titles. Do that too early in a console cycle and it'll cost them a fortune and possibly train some consumers to wait it out on games they want...this has already happened to indie games, based on how often you see people say "will wait for PS+ on this one."
But, man, I still think a lot of the offerings have been great and across 3 platforms, the value is insane.
But, man, I still think a lot of the offerings have been great and across 3 platforms, the value is insane.
Thebeardofknowledge
Banned
The sense of entitlement by some people in here is disgusting as fuck.
family_guy
Member
It does suck. PS3 had it so much better. What the hell ever happened to the 1 hour full game trials?
I've had a wonderful time with PS+ and it's opened my eyes to lots of games I might not otherwise have played. But then I tend to play as many weird indie games as I can. I can see it being less of a value for those not actively interested in those types of games, but I urge everyone to give some of the free stuff a shot even if it doesn't immediately interest you. You may be surprised at what's fun.
Dragonslayer_023
Banned
I don't want AAA games on PS+, because chances are I've already played them. If you wanted Knack so badly wouldn't you have bought it by now? It's probably pretty cheap. I'd much rather get games that I might not have heard of, or bought anyway.
Japanmanx3
Member
You can't expect brand new triple A titles for free. Give it time. The library is just now getting to a point where it would be feasible to up the quality on games offered. And since its not even the main incentive for most anymore its not even the biggest of issues.
bananafactory
Banned
This is how I feel. Plus I find many of the best and most interesting games right now are in the indie space, not AAA
It's not about being really desperate to play Knack, it's about seeing what game you're getting and thinking 'oh yeah I heard about that at E3' not 'huh, what is this weird thing? Oh it's 2D zombies, ok.'
I don't buy every AAA game. I'm all digital. Give me the stuff I missed.
Yeah I agree we need some more big games in the Plus lineup. People in this thread are extremely thirsty for those so they should get more.
But that list of games just opened my eyes to the fact that I tend to enjoy the smaller titles offered on Plus, because for AAA games I'm interested in, I buy them at launch or when there's a good price drop after 6+ months.
Definitely some cool big games I miss out on too are amazing to get i.e. DmC
But something like Towerfall alone has given me over 50 hours of entertainment compared to a lot of AAA stuff.