PS+ Not Required For Free-to-Play Online Games

[wearesoneutralthatithurts]

Logic: If something is free to play, it can therefore be free online, but if you have payed for a game, you now must pay even more to get it online.

And Sony was doing so well in terms of treating consumers right...

well i think 5$/? /month NOT only to play online(like xboxgold) no, you get aa heckton of games for that, games for which you would pay more than 5/month.. i mean if i can get xcom and other cool games on a rent for 5/month-that is A very very very good price for service-thing

and if they say, the publisher can decide to not use +, than thats okay fo me, i hope/think that it might have other ways for publishing it-if you can go into internet, maybe you can dowload free to play games on your console or such..

so, if i compare xboxgold with +, then the latter is better-its cheaper and it offers better service, because i cant remeber being able to play games like xcom&co while i used the xboxgold-thing,

 

[Simple Bluff]

...but leaving it "up to the publisher" is a tad worrisome, as a lot of recent "monetization" decisions [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/121640-EA-Brings-Microtransactions-to-Dead-Space-3] from certain publishers have left me somewhat, unwilling to trust them when it comes to trying to bleed the customer dry.

I don't get it. What would publishers gain by making it PS+ exclusive? Maybe I'm mistaken, but doesn't all the money from PS+ go directly to Sony? If that was the case then there'd be no point. Also, it would deter people without PS+ from playing their game. The entire point of F2P is to reel in players with their "Well, there's no harm in TRYING it, right? It's free!" policy. Then bleed them slowly with micro-transactions.

There are no upsides for publishers to do this.

 

[IronMit]

Why would this happen? Is it basically if F2P games want to piggyback off PSN servers or something...or if they want to run one themselves?

Or maybe making it ps+ exclusive means sony pays them a lump sum and they share the profits of microtransactions?

I don't understand how online works..but that kind of makes sense either way.

It's good to see Sony are getting people to join by providing an attractive service rather then making it mandatory.
What would be cool is if they had a psn lite for half the price of PS+. The same but without the free games....for the consumers that are picky about games.

 

[idarkphoenixi]

If everyone who wants multiplayer has to pay for ps+ (which will probably be everyone) then I can't help but wonder if all the great benefits will shrink over time.
Since ps+ is no longer an added incentive but a requirement.

 

[Terramax]

Logic: If something is free to play, it can therefore be free online, but if you have payed for a game, you now must pay even more to get it online.

And Sony was doing so well in terms of treating consumers right...

Sony is leaving it up the the publishers. However, I don't think there's too much to worry about. Because when publishers find people aren't paying extra for online gaming for their games, and instead flocking to rival company's games, who're doing online for free, they'll likely drop charged online all-together.

The only publishers I can imagine taking advantage of this are companies like Activision, where games like CoD are so popular, where online is the meat of the game, fans might be willing to dish out extra money. That, and MMOs.

 

[Alfador_VII]

Howabout this: If it's Free to play, leave it FREE to play. Not "free to play up to the developers/publishers/pony overlords."

Is anyone else completely fed up with all the weasel words in this generation's hype?

If you don't want the "weasel words", or indeed the option of actual free to play, just go with Xbox One (or 360) where all online play needs Gold membership

 

[Evil Smurf]

Howabout this: If it's Free to play, leave it FREE to play. Not "free to play up to the developers/publishers/pony overlords."

Is anyone else completely fed up with all the weasel words in this generation's hype?

If you don't want the "weasel words", or indeed the option of actual free to play, just go with Xbox One (or 360) where all online play needs Gold membership

Or you know, use your PC. Free online multiplayer you know.

 

[Nieroshai]

Howabout this: If it's Free to play, leave it FREE to play. Not "free to play up to the developers/publishers/pony overlords."

Is anyone else completely fed up with all the weasel words in this generation's hype?

You haven't been paying attention, have you? Since "Free to play" became a thing, there has ALWAYS been a catch, and publishers ALWAYS have a say. Turbine with DDO, EA with TOR, NCSoft with its gaggle of games, Perfect World with STO, FunCom with The Secret World, Etc etc etc. "Free to play" as it's pitched is a lie most of the time, this is nothing new or out of the ordinary. If a publisher wants the game to be truly free, they will not ask Sony to charge for it. But it's THEIR CHOICE.

 

[kyoodle]

Very few publishers making free-to-play games are going to restrict their potential audience by making it only available to PS+ users.

People need to stop latching onto lines like 'it's up to publishers' and deciding it's always negative without applying it to the situation.

That said if Sony had kept online play free this distinction wouldn't be a problem :\

 

[Alfador_VII]

Or you know, use your PC. Free online multiplayer you know.

Well obviously, sticking with the PC Gaming Master Race will always be better, but I didn't want to get into console bashing just yet

 

[Whytewulf]

Howabout this: If it's Free to play, leave it FREE to play. Not "free to play up to the developers/publishers/pony overlords."

Is anyone else completely fed up with all the weasel words in this generation's hype?

Hasn't the decision to make a free to play game free always been up to the developers/publisher/pony overlords. I am seriously think about it for a second.

If I were to venture a wild asked guess, I would say that: if it is included in the PS+ membership that Sony is paying to manage servers much in the same way Microsoft currently does with Xbox Live. If it is outside of the PS+ sub the developer/publisher/pony overlords assume all cost a management responsibilities. This sounds completely reasonable to me. Shrug.
quote]

I agree.. Are people just looking for the negative. Do they think these companies can just manage servers for free?

 

[Colt47]

Why is it people are trying to bash down good news? Sony is basically saying that if a player is primarily interested in free to play and streaming services they don't need to invest in PS+. This makes a LOT of sense considering that if someone was getting it just for those two features the PS+ membership has no real benefits.

Also, I feel like someone needs to get a blow horn cleared out to shout out every time this subject comes up, but in order for there to be games on the system, the publishers have to want to publish on it! If a publisher wants a requirement for their game and a console manufacturer refuses to provide the means for it, they can quite easily not publish their game on the said system and put it on the competing systems only. The only way a console manufacturer could get away with forcing publishers to withhold some arbitrary requirement on their game is if all the console manufacturers unilaterally blocked the option, which Microsoft is never going to do and therefore Sony, who also depends on third party publishing, is going to have to follow suit.

 

[TiberiusEsuriens]

Sony was quoted a year after launch that they viewed making online free a "mistake." This has been like 10 years incoming, but everyone is surprised? Being said, I don't care, and like mostly what they're doing with the PS4.

I'd really like to know how they deal with MMOs, as the console is slated to have several at or near release. If I'm paying monthly for ESO (no clue if its sub model), do I have to pay again to play it? It'd make a lot more sense to charge only for non-sub games due to someone having to maintain the servers.

 

[Simalacrum]

Wait? do publishers get a cut of the PS Plus fee? If they don't why would they intentionally segregate a portion of gamers from playing their game?

 

[nexus]

Man, people who scream for Free to Play really bother me.

You want to play a *FREE* AAA online game with lots of content, with no hassles and you don't want to open your wallet? Okay. You want that company to pay your bills for you too, while you play their game?

 

[nexus]

I have a PS+ account because it's good value for money. But making online play PS+ only is a dick move. There's literally no justifiable reason to do it.

Yes, it's been the only dick-move by Sony in an otherwise stellar reveal. No reason to do it at all, and while I'm also a PS+ member for reasons obvious, I don't feel it should be required for basic service, which is already offered on PSN right now.

It will be heaps better than Live Gold, but it shouldn't be forced. I hate Microsoft for forcing Gold, its a trash service, you get virtually nothing for paying in, and you still get inundated with a piece of shit dashboard flooded with all sorts of advertisements, like you're just a useless resource being mined for revenue. That's what we we really are when it comes right down to it, but show some restraint, damn.

The PS+ paywall is supposedly really lenient though, so there is that.

 

[Dendio]

I'm actually ok with this. Currently I have a 360 so i'm used to pay for live, it sucks, but i deal with it. I was hoping that it would be free like the PS3, but right now my mind is allready completely made up on jumping onto the Sony Ship that im going to overlook this.

I felt that way about my old wow sub. It sucked but I learned to deal. However, now after years of that bad gut feeling about throwing 15 bucks down the drain every month, I now despise blizzard as being a huge rip-off in the end. I will not be buying any more blizzard games.

I feel that unnecessary subscriptions tend to make consumers leave in disgust in the end, as I did.

 

[Something Amyss]

If you don't want the "weasel words", or indeed the option of actual free to play, just go with Xbox One (or 360) where all online play needs Gold membership

There's no freedom from weasel words in Microsoft's world.

You haven't been paying attention, have you?

Apparently, you haven't, if "adding more catches" is a reasonable excuse based on the notion that there has "always been catches."

By that logic, the Xbone's daily check-in DRM isn't worth complaining about because there's "always been DRM."

Do you support the Bone?