Support NeoGAF

[xxracerxx]

Just what do people expect for £40 a year?

Blowjobs and that sweet, sweet Knack every month. Anything else is a slap in the face.

 

[Solaire of Astora]

Btw, does anyone know if I will be able to access my plus titles off the 10 day trial card that comes with a new ps4? My membership lapsed a month ago and I'm waiting for a $40 deal to come up.

I don't think so. If I recall correctly, unlike xblg, you can't redeem a ps plus trial if you've ever been a plus member. Not even the trail that comes with the system. I'll defend most things plus related as I see the value in the service, but that's pretty bad.

 

[toythatkills]

Just what do people expect for £40 a year?

They're hardly going to give away AAA titles every month are they? We've had some great indie titles in there, plus you get some decent discounts in the store and the ability to play online.

Well the argument goes that "that's what they used to do on PS3."

On the face of it that's fair enough, but the argument breaks down under any scrutiny at all. PS+ was three years old at that point and had been dominated by download games during that time, the PS3 was six years old and had a massive library, and the PS4 was on the horizon so PS3 games weren't selling that well, lots of factors contributed to the wealth of retail games that were offered during that short period of time and they're not factors anymore.

It's probably also worth considering the ratio of retail games to download games on either system. PS3 has about 1.2 disk based games for every download game. PS4 has something like 0.25 disk based games for every downloadable title. With download games dominating the release schedule now, it's not unexpected that they would dominate Plus too.

(figures taken from Wikipedia, but they should be accurate enough.)

 

[kriskrosbbk]

I might be burnt but I prefer the EA access service . For indies I would open my wallet.

 

[Melchiah]

*shrug*

I guess that's one way to put their thin lineup in a positive light.

I like some horror-themed games, too, but I would hesitate to call BB a real horror game and UD felt more like a comedy than something truly inspiring fear or terror. Soma might be the best thing in that list and the only one to qualify for my tastes, but I can get that on PC if I was interested. Anyway, that statement was merely to underscore my point about Sony not having to really try that hard with their PS+ lineup on PS4 since a subscription is required to use multiplayer now.

It's not an attempt to put anything in a more positive light, as those three are the games I'm looking forward to play the most. You were comparing the line-up to their closest competitor, so I dunno what PC has to do with it, especially when two of those games can't be played on PC.

There's no question that BB is a horror game, and the same goes for Until Dawn, which is inspired by the horror B-movies of old. I find it odd to claim, that they wouldn't belong to the genre.

Then there's the rest of the year preceding the fall, that seems to be overlooked when the fall line-up is brought into the conversation, which brought Bloodborne, The Vanishing of Ethan Carter, and Everybody's Gone to the Rapture. None of which can be played on the closest competitor's platform. Six horror games in total, of which two can be played on PC, makes the PS4 a goldmine for fans of horror like me.


As for PS+ service, I'm subscribing to it for the games, discounts and backup saves, and I'd continue to do so even if online play was free. The PS+ discount just saved me 2,84€ when I bought SOMA, which is not bad on top of the IGC considering the subscription costs 4,16€/month.

 

[213372bu]

tfw you thought getting a fighting game on vita every month was a bad thing

 

[travisbickle]

*shrug*

I guess that's one way to put their thin lineup in a positive light.

I like some horror-themed games, too, but I would hesitate to call BB a real horror game and UD felt more like a comedy than something truly inspiring fear or terror. Soma might be the best thing in that list and the only one to qualify for my tastes, but I can get that on PC if I was interested. Anyway, that statement was merely to underscore my point about Sony not having to really try that hard with their PS+ lineup on PS4 since a subscription is required to use multiplayer now.

The team that chooses the titles for PS+, picked out the breakout indie hit of the year, Rocket League, it's getting a little obtuse (not just you) to keep repeating that they're not trying hard because they haven't put TombRaider on the service.

 

[1er tigre]

First of all, I want to say that, for the money, the PS+ offer is still good but honestly I find that the PS4 offering is far worse than it was on PS3.

I keep reading people making fun of complaints that are a bit silly against PS+ and that's ok. But I also see some bullshit to defend it.

First, some people act like we are only getting super high rated small budget games that should be a vast improvement upon mediocre to average and very old big budget games we used to get on PS3 (or that we may get on PS4).
But it's not what we get on PS4 and it was not what we used to get on PS3.
I read post like "I'd rather play rocket league, transistor, velocity 2X than knack, killzone and Assassin's creed". Yeah right, I think most of us agree with that. On the other side, I can also say that I'd rather play bioshock, arkham city, vanquish and demon's souls than entwined, mousecraft, ether one and tower of guns.

I also see false argument like "on PS3 there were 5 or 6 years of big budget games to choose from" and yet they offered games from 4 to 18 months old most of the time.

Or "we only get big games to promote the sequel". Yeah sure, Arkham City hit PS+ on december 2012 (it was one year old at the time) and Arkham Origins released in fall 2013, it's one hell of a early marketing campaign. Far Cry 3 ? One year before far cry 4.
And what sequel was promoted with the offering of vanquish, metal gear rising, mass effect 3, bioshock infinite, metro last light, DMC, tomb raider, dead space 3, etc. ?

I also read that the current games offered have as a wide appeal as before, yet, we see a lot of complaints that we shouldn't see with games with "wide appeal" and that we never saw 2 years ago.
Now, every month, on the PS Blog and on every PS+ thread on every gaming forum, there are loads of people complaining about the game selection. It was not the case two years ago. It was all "what a great amount of content", "holy crap, fantastic month"
and curiously there was no thread like the one we are arguing in. Two or three years ago threads were all about how incredible PS+ was, there were even thread about it being a better deal than steam sales.
We can say that PS+ is greater than ever but it seems that many people disagree strongly with that.

Honestly, I am ok with small budget games and I'm not asking for a big budget game every month but a bit of balance shouldn't hurt and throwing games like Wolfenstein TNO, Alien Isolation, The Evil Within, Infamous or Shadow of mordor from time to time should be feasible and be gladly welcome by many...

 

[Synth]

The team that chooses the titles for PS+, picked out the breakout indie hit of the year, Rocket League, it's getting a little obtuse (not just you) to keep repeating that they're not trying hard because they haven't put TombRaider on the service.

Oh come on... they've picked out so many indies, that it would have been amazing if they had somehow missed it. This is all on Rocket League for being amazing, and not on Sony's incredibly discerning selection prowess.

 

[VLiberty]

Oh come on... they've picked out so many indies, that it would have been amazing if they had somehow missed it. This is all on Rocket League for being amazing, and not on Sony's incredibly discerning selection prowess.

The fact is that very few of the indie games offered on PS+ aren't good. Most of them are good, great or even better: Velocity 2x, for example, is one of the best games I've played in years.

 

[toythatkills]

Games with Gold offers four games rather than six. Games with Gold offers games on systems with vastly differing numbers of users. Games with Gold has no cross-buy feature so two Xbox One games means two Xbox One games. Xbox LIVE Gold costs more than PlayStation Plus.

It's in no way comparable, and I'm stunned you couldn't see it.

I don't think that those differences makes them in no way comparable. The Xbox One may not have any cross-buy features but with the backward compatibility that is coming, depending on the games it can fill that role. But fair enough if that's your opinion I respect it.

I guess they're comparable, maybe I used the wrong wording; what I mean is that you can't take conclusions about one service and apply them wholesale to the other because they're not nearly similar enough to allow for that.

It will be quite interesting to see what happens to GwG when backwards compatibility really kicks in though.

Well I guess what happens is that when Games with Gold offers a title which is available on two platforms, it counts as two games rather than one.

Pretty hard to argue that Microsoft is offering more value there!

 

[Fushichou187]

The fact is that very few of the indie games offered on PS+ aren't good. Most of them are good, great or even better: Velocity 2x, for example, is one of the best games I've played in years.

I'm with you that the majority of indie games offered on PS+ have been good, but saying stuff like "it's a fact" doesn't really help things here since it's all totally subjective; You and I are lucky because either our tastes in games is broad enough whereby we're able to enjoy the variety that gets offered each month, or that Sony is selecting games that happen to be squarely in our wheelhouse. But it's all still subjective. It's entertainment, after all. This thread exists because some people's tastes aren't being accommodated and they feel like screaming into the void with like-minded souls will make them feel better

 

[hawk2025]

Oh come on... they've picked out so many indies, that it would have been amazing if they had somehow missed it. This is all on Rocket League for being amazing, and not on Sony's incredibly discerning selection prowess.

lol

Damned if you do, damned if you don't, I suppose.

 

[Synth]

lol

Damned if you do, damned if you don't, I suppose.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that Sony aren't trying. But skipping over Rocket League would have been more a display of incompetence in selection, more than it being impressive that they picked it.

 

[hawk2025]

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that Sony aren't trying. But skipping over Rocket League would have been more a display of incompetence in selection, more than it being impressive that they picked it.

I don't see why, for three reasons.

First, read the PS+ thread in June before RL was out. There isn't this massive indication that people in general would love RL, save for reactions from the tiny beta.

Two, it's not like they just have a pick of the litter and can put whatever they wish on the program, as elucidated by Psyonix's post on why the game was on PS+, and how it involved multiple rounds of negotiation. Psyonix denied the offer eventually, but they went back and sweetened the deal because they really wanted Rocket League on the program:

PS+ Instant Game Collection has been an interesting story for us. When the great people at Sony proposed it to us a while back we thought it was a great idea. At the time we didn’t know if the game was going to be successful enough for all the work we put into it and this would be a way to expose it to a larger audience. We always knew that Rocket League would be big if we could get enough people to try it.

Then…the Beta happened. With all the new hype surrounding the game it didn’t seem to make sense to go forward with PS+ IGC. At this point we were pretty set to go forward with a regular release. Then Sony stepped up and told us how much they really wanted the game on IGC. They made us a solid offer and promised to really help promote the title. Coupled with the larger player base and general goodwill it spreads we decided to go for it.

Third, there are dozens of indie games released monthly on PS4, so the implication of your statement is also confusing in that sense -- lots of different new games they could have added to the July line-up, or gone back to the hundreds of Indie games out on the platform that haven't been on PS+ yet.


You are severely downplaying the choice of the game.

 

[Synth]

I don't see why, for three reasons.

First, read the PS+ thread in June before RL was out. There isn't this massive indication that people in general would love RL, save for reactions from the tiny beta.

Two, it's not like they just have a pick of the litter and can put whatever they wish on the program, as elucidated by Psyonix's post on why the game was on PS+, and how it involved multiple rounds of negotiation. Psyonix denied the offer eventually, but they went back and sweetened the deal because they really wanted Rocket League on the program:

Third, there are dozens of indie games released monthly on PS4, so the implication of your statement is also confusing in that sense -- lots of different new games they could have added to the July line-up, or gone back to the hundreds of Indie games out on the platform that haven't been on PS+ yet.

You are severely downplaying the choice of the game.

If I'm downplaying, then I guess you're probably overstating. The point has been made constantly in this thread that the selection now favors smaller, but more current games. I'm not sure the best way to check a full list of games released on PS4, but for via Wikipedia the month of July (ruling out full price retail releases for obvious reasons) the lineup would have looked something like:

Pneuma: Breath of Life
Rocket League
The Fall
The Vanishing of Ethan Carter
Hatoful Boyfriend
Journey

Now, maybe I'm just giving myself too much credit here, but if I was selecting games for something like the IGC, the game that isn't an old port, and is currently generating a bunch of hype as a result of the recent beta (which the devs seem to have communicated directly as part of the negotiation) would be a really easy selection for me. The game itself is obviously great (I haven't actually tried it yet), but it's selection really isn't some stroke of genius.

 

[hawk2025]

In which universe did I say it was a stroke of genius?

 

[Bolivar687]

I don't think Sony should be commended for the ingenuity of choosing Rocket League but it's pretty clear that they were willing to fight to get it on the menu for PS+ users and that's much appreciated.

Also, predicting breakout indie hits isn't that easy. There was a lot of hype leading up to Hotline Miami 2 as well. I personally loved it but it nonetheless shows that you shouldn't take decisions like this as obvious.

 

[Synth]

In which universe did I say it was a stroke of genius?

You didn't. And I didn't say you did.

I don't think Sony should be commended for the ingenuity of choosing Rocket League but it's pretty clear that they were willing to fight to get it on the menu for PS+ users and that's much appreciated.

Also, predicting breakout indie hits isn't that easy. There was a lot of hype leading up to Hotline Miami 2 as well. I personally loved it but it nonetheless shows that you shouldn't take decisions like that as a given.

Yea, I agree that predicting breakout hits isn't exactly the simplest thing in the world. That's not really what I'm getting at though. More that it being a "breakout hit" is a credit to the game itself and those who made it, rather than a show of PS+'s discerning selection. It's not like they were discovering it amongst thousands of other suitable choices for the month.

 

[Diprosalic]

I wouldn't qualify Rayman, Tomb Raider or Black Flag either as mediocre or badly reviewed personally.

i think they are extremely mediocre.

 

[Morrigan Stark]

i think they are extremely mediocre.

Rayman, really? I agree with the other two but Rayman was awesome, especially in coop.

 

[SapientWolf]

I don't think Sony should be commended for the ingenuity of choosing Rocket League but it's pretty clear that they were willing to fight to get it on the menu for PS+ users and that's much appreciated.

Also, predicting breakout indie hits isn't that easy. There was a lot of hype leading up to Hotline Miami 2 as well. I personally loved it but it nonetheless shows that you shouldn't take decisions like this as obvious.

Indie games don't have any ad campaigns or media hype, so Rocket League's success is partially due to Sony stepping up and promoting the game. And they should certainly be commended for what they've done for indies this generation as a whole. Especially considering the 180 MS did after the 360.