Support NeoGAF

[Tealmann]

I hate how so many people excuse paying for online when it used to be free with "But I get free games with it!"
If you really cared about those games you would have already bought them.

 

[dosh]

Oh my apologies, i really worded my previous post poorly, i should proofread things!. Didnt mean like you are forced to play online because your friends do so. But sometimes friends dictate the platform you end up playing on and you have to swallow an arbitrary fee for no reason other than the fact you want to play with them. Thats really silly.

Ho yeah I get that, and I can't really argue. I've seen a shit ton of friends paying for xbl and ps+ just to play COD together.

In my case, it's more a case of content driving the decision though. There's absolutely no other way to play Bloodborne online, for instance, and as soon as they announced the game, I knew I was going to pay. That doesn't make things any less silly, and one could argue that I still have the choice to ignore the co-op and pvp entirely, but I feel like they're an important part of the game and I want in on it.

I probably won't renew my ps+ account just to play Dark Souls 3 online when it's released though, since I can buy the Steam version.

While i dont think voting with our wallet will do a lot, since the majority of the userbase already showed they dont mind paying for it... But i also dont think saying "thats just the way things are" and accepting their shit is helpful.

You just can't win them all. I can easily stear clear from as many shitty practices as possible in this industry, but I guess there was always going to be that specific case where I end up saying "fuck it, they got me."

 

[Fisty]

Sounds like OP should have bought the PS3 version

 

[Moon_frogger]

I dont know the costs of funding dedicated servers honestly, im sure someone else can answer this question for us, but the issue is: If dedicated servers are out of the question, and Sony is not going to guarantee any sort of quality control for the games on their platform... what exact is the consumer paying for, really?

Edit: Actually an acceptable solution would be to let people host their own servers. Heck even purchase them from "select" services would be better than how it is now.





"Added value!!"
Ridicolous.

I agree that you are basically paying for nothing, which is why I don't own a console. Also, pretty sure battlefield games let you rent servers.

 

[oneida]

I agree that you are basically paying for nothing, which is why I don't own a console. Also, pretty sure battlefield games let you rent servers.

Having directly compared the quality paid online vs free online on consoles I disagree that you are paying for nothing.

 

[TaterTots]

If it wasn't for Gears I wouldn't be paying. I probably wouldn't have a XB1 either.

 

[OmegaTreeFish]

I hate how so many people excuse paying for online when it used to be free with "But I get free games with it!"
If you really cared about those games you would have already bought them.

Lots of people look at this service in different ways. Many seem to pick out one single aspect of it (such as online) and say £40 a yeah for online is a rip off. And yes, on its own it is. But you should look at the service as a whole. Then its a pretty acceptable value. It's less that £4 a month for:
- Online play access (yes it seems unfair but in theory Sony's end should be a better service than it is in its older platforms)
- additional discounts on many sale items
- 2 ps4, 2 ps3 and 2 vita games added to IGC, often with cross play.
- 10 gig cloud storage.
- auto updates in sleep mode etc.

Now I look at that list and think that for £4 a month il happily take those mystery games, additional discount and cloud storage. I think the other 2 should prob be free but.I get why they are not from a business perspective. So as a whole, the service is fine for me.

As for buying the games if I cared, people don't always just buy games they really care about. Why do you think steam sales are so successful. There are tons of PC gamers (including myself) who have steam libraries full of games they bought on a wim through steam sales, humble bundles etc and not played.

I look at the IGC as a similar thing. It allows me to try stuff I was unsure of and wasn't willing to put the money down for. I just finished Styx which was actually really good and earlier in the year played that infamous side story. Those alone almost cover the sub cost for the whole year and I wouldn't have played either without psplus. I would also include grow home but I got that on PC and that is one of my fav games of the year. There's other games I have ayed for maybe only an hour but was interesting just to taste so I'm glad I didn't pay out full price for them (games like ether one). Add the games I bought with discount and I have easily saved money.

Back when I played on 360 I really resented the fee as all it gave you was online. I don't care about it at all with psplus because I like the other aspects of it.

If you hate every aspect of it then of course you will resent it but then you have 2 choices. Pay for the service or dont. Sucks if your in that position I don't really think there is much you can do about itat this point. It's part of playing online on a console and you need to factor it in when you buy the hardware.

TLDR:
It's easy to call it a rip off if you cherry pick a single thing, but try looking at the service as a whole. How much it costs a month and the sort of other thing you might spend that same amount of money on.

 

[Warxard]

When everything is "Indie" then why not just call it what it is instead of generalizing it to "Games"?

Good job shitting on small-scale developers there because your skewed, shitty perspective on these games doesn't fit your scale , champ.

Independently-developed titles are games. Stop bullshitting.

 

[Mass_Pincup]

Good job shitting on small-scale developers there because your skewed, shitty perspective on these games doesn't fit your scale , champ.

Independently-developed titles are games. Stop bullshitting.

Stating that indie games are indie games is shitting on small-scale developers?

Since when does indie games have a negative connotation?

 

[Moon_frogger]

Having directly compared the quality paid online vs free online on consoles I disagree that you are paying for nothing.

Steam has a better quality service than Xbox live and it doesn't cost a thing. No idea what you mean.

 

[Tealmann]

Lots of people look at this service in different ways. Many seem to pick out one single aspect of it (such as online) and say £40 a yeah for online is a rip off. And yes, on its own it is. But you should look at the service as a whole. Then its a pretty acceptable value. It's less that £4 a month for:
- Online play access (yes it seems unfair but in theory Sony's end should be a better service than it is in its older platforms)
- additional discounts on many sale items
- 2 ps4, 2 ps3 and 2 vita games added to IGC, often with cross play.
- 10 gig cloud storage.
- auto updates in sleep mode etc.

Now I look at that list and think that for £4 a month il happily take those mystery games, additional discount and cloud storage. I think the other 2 should prob be free but.I get why they are not from a business perspective. So as a whole, the service is fine for me.

As for buying the games if I cared, people don't always just buy games they really care about. Why do you think steam sales are so successful. There are tons of PC gamers (including myself) who have steam libraries full of games they bought on a wim through steam sales, humble bundles etc and not played.

I look at the IGC as a similar thing. It allows me to try stuff I was unsure of and wasn't willing to put the money down for. I just finished Styx which was actually really good and earlier in the year played that infamous side story. Those alone almost cover the sub cost for the whole year and I wouldn't have played either without psplus. I would also include grow home but I got that on PC and that is one of my fav games of the year. There's other games I have ayed for maybe only an hour but was interesting just to taste so I'm glad I didn't pay out full price for them (games like ether one). Add the games I bought with discount and I have easily saved money.

Back when I played on 360 I really resented the fee as all it gave you was online. I don't care about it at all with psplus because I like the other aspects of it.

If you hate every aspect of it then of course you will resent it but then you have 2 choices. Pay for the service or dont. Sucks if your in that position I don't really think there is much you can do about itat this point. It's part of playing online on a console and you need to factor it in when you buy the hardware.

TLDR:
It's easy to call it a rip off if you cherry pick a single thing, but try looking at the service as a whole. How much it costs a month and the sort of other thing you might spend that same amount of money on.

I don't want a "service", I want what I already had, and what everyone except Playstation and Xbox will give me

 

[OmegaTreeFish]

I don't want a "service", I want what I already had, and what everyone except Playstation and Xbox will give me

OK.... But things change and if you don't want to use that service then don't pay for it or use a platform that doesn't require it. As I said, you need to include that choice in your original hardware purchasing choice.

Things as a service is becoming the norm amoung most media industries. Music, books, film and games. A lot of people are fine with it and that's why it's getting more common.

 

[oneida]

Steam has a better quality service than Xbox live and it doesn't cost a thing. No idea what you mean.

Steam is not on consoles.

 

[To Far Away Times]

P2P online should always be free.

It's especially bad on Xbox since it's so heavily advertising supported (at least on 360), it really felt like I shouldn't be paying on top of that.

 

[Sayter]

I agree with the OP to a point. XBL is worth the money. PSN is not. If Nintendo offered more VoIP options, as well as better notifications, it would be perfect.

 

[Warxard]

Stating that indie games are indie games is shitting on small-scale developers?

Since when does indie games have a negative connotation?

Using Indie as a negative connotation as SoS did in his previous post, is bad and gives the implication that Indie titles are lesser experiences than 'normal' games (whatever the fuck that means). It's a common mindset a lot of games had since these games were corralled into the 'arcade' stable with XBL.

No one will ever see these games as nothing but 'indie' and that's a fucking shame.

 

[RichiRamjag]

The Internet connection itself is required on my end for the bandwidth neccessary to stream. How is PS+ a necessity for me to play a peer-to-peer game save the artificial barrier?

It's obviously not. Don't use it. Problem solved. MGO has terrible netcode. It isn't fun by Sony, or anything of that nature. Try it on PC when it releases and it's a win/win.

 

[KyanMehwulfe]

I like PS+ for the games... But I don't understand why it's required for online MP that is peer 2 peer or pub/dev hosted...

MGO is peer 2 peer, in the most archaic sense... any server-side data I presume is hosted by Konami... what exactly are we paying Sony for.

especially when in the past PS+ wasn't required for the exact same service

it's just a cash grab that Sony can get away with because XBL does it so enough people are accustomed to paying for online and don't ask any other questions.

 

[Robot Pants]

These are all problems with MGO not ps+
And I'm pretty certain your disconnect problems are on your end. Gonna take a wild guess at that

 

[SomTervo]

Man check out all these free movies and tv shows I get with amazon prime, like 26 new movies this month, that's literally like £0.2307692307692308 each rather than the £5 they'd cost without, gold bless amazon prime and their free movies. Not to mention you actually get access to backlog as well even if you weren't subbed when they were added. All praise amazon prime.

And locking cloud saves behind a paywall is super dumb, even microsoft lets non gold members cloud save for free. MICROSOFT.

Not the same. I'm getting two free games per month (five if you include PS3 and PSV), most of which are great. It's not the same volume or bargain-bucket structure of Netflix/Amazon.

Yeah, I guess the cloud saves thing is a decent argument. I think it's more justified now thay they upped it to 10GB per person, which is really worth the extra money. The original 1-2GB was laughable (I think it was less?)

And also a bullshit thing to place behind a paywall.

And the games you get are essentially rentals, considering you have to keep paying a subscription fee to access them.

The games are usually around 5-10 hours long. I don't need to own them forever to enjoy them. Even if you install a game and play it for an hour then put it down and never play it again, you're still getting good value out of it. It's an entertainment lease, if you will.

It's also not like a traditional rental because you don't send the games back during the time. You keep the games for every month you have them. If I don't play this month's games (which I fully intend to but probably wont have a chance to) then that's fine. They will roll over to next month, so next month's £4 cost is actually for 20 hours entertainment rather than 5-10. Then if I don't play those it rolls over into the next month.

The value gets better every month you're subscribed. It's bloody great.

Then if you have some urge to play a game years later when you don't have PSN, it costs £5 to activate the service for one month. That isn't cheap at all - but it is probably less than half the price the game would cost to buy, anyway.

 

[The Jackdog]

Meh.

I think sony and microsoft both have done enough to justify the price, and make it more than just paying for online

 

[The Jackdog]

I hate how so many people excuse paying for online when it used to be free with "But I get free games with it!"
If you really cared about those games you would have already bought them.

this is hardly true. ive gotten a lot of games with ps+ and gold that ive really liked and wouldnt have tried otherwise

 

[Ricky_R]

It's just the way the system is now. Unfortunetly you have to pay for the right to play online and the experience not only depends on Sony's infrastructure, but on the games' netcode as well.

You may be against the practice, but the root of your problem lies on Konami's side.

 

[Shari]

I couldnt believe my eyes when I saw several people saying that games "given" in PSN Plus were great.

Then I see peeps deviating the subject of thread towards the old debate about indie games being full games or not and I know what we're doing here.

If you guys are in for the free games have a look at EA Access which is a millions times better price/value for "free" games.

Paying to play online in 2015 is a joke, specially when they can't even force devs/pubs to implement a proper server architecture for their online play (MGO3 comes in handy here).

Then you see Sony's stability with PSN or the fact they give 100MB altogether for your cloud saves while Steam gives a 100MB per game without getting anything out of it and you start to put thing's in perspective.

but the root of your problem lies on Konami's side

LOL.

Hopefully he tried the online with the PSN trial, dunno what would have happened if he was all hyped and payed the full year sub.

 

[SomTervo]

I couldnt believe my eyes when I saw several people saying that games "given" in PSN Plus were great.

Then I see peeps deviating the subject of thread towards the old debate about indie games being full games or not and I know what we're doing here.

If you guys are in for the free games have a look at EA Access which is a millions times better price/value for "free" games.

Paying to play online in 2015 is a joke, specially when they can't even force devs/pubs to implement a proper server architecture for their online play (MGO3 comes in handy here).

Then you see Sony's stability with PSN or the fact they give 100MB altogether for your cloud saves while Steam gives a 100MB per game without getting anything out of it and you start to put thing's in perspective.



LOL.

Hopefully he tried the online with the PSN trial, dunno what would have happened if he was all hyped and payed the full year sub.

I agree EA Access is better, but I disagree otherwise. It's clear MGO3's issues are MGO3's issues alone, when every other multiplayer game on my PS4 runs perfectly.

Also the Cloud Storage thing used to be a good argument, but now PS+ offers 10GB of Cloud Storage, to make it actually worthwhile.

Don't quite understand your indie/'given' games argument. You seem to be disagreeing with yourself.

 

[Shari]

I agree EA Access is better, but I disagree otherwise. It's clear MGO3's issues are MGO3's issues alone, when every other multiplayer game on my PS4 runs perfectly.

Also the Cloud Storage thing used to be a good argument, but now PS+ offers 10GB of Cloud Storage, to make it actually worthwhile.

Don't quite understand your indie/'given' games argument. You seem to be disagreeing with yourself.

I didnt know about the cloud storage, thanks for that. Still not cool to add a industry-standard feature as premium for your service, but this is where we are.

About MGO3 and other P2P games (GTAV I look at you) I just dont understand how it's ok to pay for this service when essentially you are not making anything towards improving that online service. MGO runs as shit as it does in other platform, so does GTAV and the games that run perfect are the games that run perfect on free-online systems.

Let's see it from another angle, how many people do you think will still be paying for PSN+/Live if it wasn't mandatory to play online? I mean, really, how many?

My point on Indie games is that they are much cheaper than AAA/Published titles and thus is way easier to break deals to include them in your PSN+/GWG lineup. Making your year out of 90% low price indies (most of the time dirt cheap and old, except for the awesome rocket league) and 10% AAA games does not fall under great value in my math.

I have nothing against indie and if the norm would be to have Rocket League (great games and just released) type of game then I'll be ok with it, but we all know this is not the case. Again, nothing against indies, just feeling that outdated indies that can be found for dirt cheap are not great value.

Edit: Full disclosure, I paid 1 year's PSN+ last week to be able to play MGO with friends and Bloodborne's DLC, and I'm ok with that, which doesn't make it ok tho.

 

[SomTervo]

I didnt know about the cloud storage, thanks for that. Still not cool to add a industry-standard feature as premium for your service, but this is where we are.

About MGO3 and other P2P games (GTAV I look at you) I just dont understand how it's ok to pay for this service when essentially you are not making anything towards improving that online service. MGO runs as shit as it does in other platform, so does GTAV and the games that run perfect are the games that run perfect on free-online systems.

Ah, I see. That makes sense. Why are we paying Sony when the developers are the ones doing the legwork anyway? That's pretty dang valid.

My point on Indie games is that they are much cheaper than AAA/Published titles and thus is way easier to break deals to include them in your PSN+/GWG lineup. Making your year out of 90% low price indies (most of the time dirt cheap and old, except for the awesome rocket league) and 10% AAA games does not fall under great value in my math.

I have nothing against indie and if the norm would be to have Rocket League (great games and just released) type of game then I'll be ok with it, but we all know this is not the case. Again, nothing against indies, just feeling that outdated indies that can be found for dirt cheap are not great value.

Maybe. I'd have to really evaluate all of the games released on it in the last two years to see whether I agree or not. Even though we get some months which are duds, other months we get brilliant games on the scheme, which I think more than makes up for it.