PS4 Online Multiplayer Requires PS+ Subscription

[PhantomEcho]

The way I see it... this is MORE than forgivable in exchange for the fact that the CONSOLE costs 100 bucks less than the competitor. I barely play multiplayer games anyway... but if I do... I'll be a helluva lot happier to shovel out the money on a PS4 than I would be to hand it over to Microsoft and their 'Fuck the customer' mentality.

Which is a shame, really. I love my Xbox 360 dearly. I was really, really hoping Microsoft hadn't gone completely fucking mental with their next-gen system.

I won't be giving them my money this go-round.

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

I expected this. $5 a month isn't really a lot for what they're offering.

 

[Varya]

It's a credit to how much Sony won this E3 that it doesn't really bother me. Yeah, sure, it should be free in the best of worlds, but if this is the area where they compromise I'm fine with it. Even with this, Sony beat MS on every single point. The only argument for a Xbone now would be if you REALLY want those exclusives, but for me, Sony won that battle too. I'll give you this one Sony.

 

[Elementary - Dear Watson]

Well... that's me sold... After having a PS1 and 2, and then switching to an XBox 360... I will be returning to the realms of Sony with the PS4! And depending on availiability of PS3 exclusives on PSN compatible with PS4, I may even pick up a cheap PS3 too with the money I saved NOT getting an XBone!

 

[Ishigami]

See my bolded part? With PS+, I can select whatever I want from Sony's free catalog (hint: more than two) and download them. I'm not restricted in that regard. So, even in attempting to mimic Sony's PS services, they can't get that correct

From where I sit it looks exactly the same.
MS will add two games to their selection every month.
I was just expressing that you can't choose which games will be added to the selection, just like with PSN+.
Maybe MS offer is different but afaik they haven't said anything about it so I guess the will copy PSN+.

 

[Beffudled Sheep_v1legacy]

Not too pleased about this. I don't game online often enough to warrant payment but I do it often enough that I'd be slightly annoyed at not being able to.
I was even thinking of trying my luck by getting into multiplayer more.
:/
I don't like this very much and I think it'd be better if it was free again but everything else about the system is really damn good (I even like the design) and since this isn't mandatory for anything else then I'll deal. Won't be a big problem for me. Might even cave one day and subscribe.
Maybe.

 

[CrazyCapnMorgan]

See my bolded part? With PS+, I can select whatever I want from Sony's free catalog (hint: more than two) and download them. I'm not restricted in that regard. So, even in attempting to mimic Sony's PS services, they can't get that correct

From where I sit it looks exactly the same.
MS will add two games to their selection every month.
I was just expressing that you can't choose which games will be added to the selection, just like with PSN+.
Maybe MS offer is different but afaik they haven't said anything about it so I guess the will copy PSN+.

Ah, my apologies then. I believe I read your post incorrectly. Might be time for me to hit the hay (I work third shift and normally I'd get home about now, but I got done early) or attempt a Microsoft and smash my face repeatedly with a frying pan and re-read everything.

 

[KoudelkaMorgan]

I never wanted Plus before, and I still don't. Free games aren't free as long as they go away the moment you quit paying.

I'm not against the idea of $5 a month for all that stuff, but I won't be subscribing. I don't really have a use for online play, but at that price I definitely don't need it.

Which means that they have lost my interest in Elder Scrolls Online and Destiny. I simply do not pay for my games more than once, and leave it up to the makers to decide when and if they ever feel like adding content.

I don't subscribe to maybes. You make an expansion, it looks good, I buy it. Sale made.

You put out something that may or may not be a work in progress, and demand a sub fee every month just to play it whether you update it or not?

No ty.

Hopefully I won't need a Plus subscription just to use the PSN store. It would be silly to make someone pay you for the chance to buy your stuff.

 

[Flames66]

No Sony, I won't pay for the multi-player component of a console.

 

[hazabaza1]

That kinda sucks.
It's still a fuckload better than what Microsoft is offerying, that's for damn sure, but it's still a shame to see.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

At least they're not gating services that I already fucking paid for behind it.

That's exactly what Sony's doing. When you pay $60 for a game, you paid your right to play online. If you're playing online, you're not playing on Sony's servers. The PSN or Xbox Live service is not even needed for online gaming, it's just a convenience, nothing more.

 

[Andy Shandy]

Honestly, PS Plus is more than worth it anyway, so provided it stays the same and keeps churning out those free games, I will happily continue to buy PS Plus.

 

[Danial]

To be quite honest they had me at "kingdom hearts 3" but I'm a dirty dirty whore so meh.


Oh and it is quite sad that Sony is winning e3 based on "hey we wont be utter bastards to you" Would have preferred a tad more... Actually new stuff. But hey thats the modern games market for you.

 

[MeChaNiZ3D]

In a nutshell, about the same price as XBL, has been much better value so far, Microsoft doing it does not somehow make it ok, and it's a damn shame because it's about the only thing about the PS4 that's making me think twice about purchasing it.

One of my problems is that it is single-account, and I have multiple accounts in order to make more characters on RPGs and more mechs in Armored Core. That's all I do. I would much rather it apply to all accounts on the system, like DLC does.

Another is that with making PS+ mandatory, it will also become widespread, and I think that poses a threat to the value for money PS+ has delivered recently. I certainly don't count on Sony putting up games for free once the majority of their playerbase will be able to capitalise on it.

Thirdly, even single player games are regularly incorporating multiplayer elements that improve the game but probably aren't worth calling multiplayer. For example, Dragon's Dogma.

So I'm not happy about it at all, and would be set on buying a PS4 if it weren't for this news, but my decision will depend on the quality of service PS+ provides in the future.

 

[GonvilleBromhead]

Must admit, I went PS3 over XBox360 due to the lack of paying for online. Despite that, it seems to me that the subscription cost may be subsidising the price of the console new somewhat. And seeing as despite my logic for going for PS3 I still never played games online...well...it might be that this is of great benefit for me, as it only makes it cheaper.

 

[Ickorus]

Too bad really, they're still a damn sight better than Microsoft but whilst I don't use multiplayer on my console it is still a real shame that they're going in that direction.

 

[wrightguy0]

you know what, i've been considering getting PS+ for a while, it's a good service with lots of extras, it does suck that online is being put behind a pay wall, but it think the extras more than make up for it.

 

[Smiley Face]

This isn't even necessarily as bad as it sounds (and it doesn't sound that bad at all, really). In all likelihood, they're using the fact that they'll get this increased long-term revenue, and using that to justify having a lower price for the main console - they'll make their large profits in the long term rather than short term, but the price differential is going to lead to a higher rate of adoption over Microsoft, as if that wasn't going to happen already. If they hadn't done this, the PS4 might have come in at a slightly higher price bracket, so really, it'll likely only cost you more money after 6-12 months or so - not to mention you get the free games. I mean seriously - the WiiU costs, what, $350? Sony's got to be getting that $400 price tag from somewhere. That or Nintendo are just morons... which, actually, is not out of the question, now that I think about it.

Of course, I could be wrong, and they could just be fleecing us, but you know what? It's a better service than XBL, what with the EXTENSIVE free games library and all, so anyone making the decision based on online stuff should still come down on Sony's side. It's better for Sony to edge out Microsoft on all fronts than to seriously outpace them in only a few.

I say let them have it - they've earned it, by managing to not shoot themselves in the foot like Nintendo and Microsoft, and as a 360 user, it's a dynamic I'm already familiar with.

 

[Gordon_4_v1legacy]

And of course if you're still in this for the single player or local co-op only, as long as getting all your DLC or demos or trailers etc, doesn't need PS+ then I don't see how you can lose as a Sony customer.