PS4 Online Multiplayer Requires PS+ Subscription

[xxBucdieselxx]

While I don't have a problem with PS Plus (I have it already for my PS3, free games are never a bad thing), this is a disappointment. Then again, I don't plan on purchasing any of the new consoles anyway. To many features that I don't want, not enough of the stuff I do want. Getting ready for the building of a PC beast!

 

[Johnson McGee]

The topic of next week's Jimquisition has been decided I think.

PS+ at least gives good value for money but I'm still not pleased to think that the business practices of MS are infecting the other consoles.

But now I must say: OMG P$4 RUINED!!!!! CHANGE IT NAOO!!!!!1

There, maybe now they'll reverse this decision before release.

 

[wulfy42]

I avoided paying for xbox live since the xbox 360 came out and I bought one. Never even used my free month. Why? Well back then it was $15 a month if I remember right (at least for month to month) and that just seemed crazy. I had a Ps3 and it was free on that system, so I got my multiplayer games on the Ps3 and was happy.

Many years later (actually fairly recently, like a year ago, I signed up for Playstation plus. Why? Because of all the free games. I have paid I don't know...maybe $60? All together.....for a ton of good games.....paying way less then $5 a pop for games I actually played and enjoyed. I also got free backup cloud save games (no clue if xbox does/did that), and auto-updates etc. I have been very pleased with what I have gotten for my money.


So going forward the fact that it's required to play online games (which btw...isn't 100% confirmed. There are multiplayer MMO type games that could require ps +...while many normal games may still have free multiplayer online support like now....Sony as far as I know has not made an official announcement about this yet) isn't going to affect me. I have oh about 2 years worth of paying for PS+ with NO MORE free games before I would even start to consider it a bad deal....and well, I'm pretty sure they are going to keep releasing them.

Also, I'm curious if the PS3 games we have gotten so far from PS+ will run on our PS4s? Allowing for backwards compatibility to some degree. Imagine if all those games we have gotten for free (or at a discount) will still be available on the Ps4 now? That would freaking rock.

I'm glad Xbox eventually dropped to $5 a month, but to me, it's STILL $5 a month for basically nothing (just being able to play games online/multiplayer..which I rarely do anyway). Sony's system on the other hand gave me way more bang for my buck game wise then I could have gotten buying used games even in bargain bins. I never felt cheated at all, and I just don't see that changing anytime soon.

 

[Viper114]

This is hardly the kind of news that will kill Sony. Does it suck considering PS3 currently doesn't do it? Yes. But let's face it, PS+ is a lot more than just MP access. Free games every month, beta access to new games, full game trials, discounts, cloud saves, and auto system updates...worth it.

 

[Quiotu]

I see a few questions that will need to be answered regarding the multiplayer gate. For one, does this mean that Sony's providing their own servers for multiplayer? I would assume so, as the reason they never charged for multiplayer was that it was the publisher's job to provide the servers up until now. My guess is this was another point that publishers and developers wanted to change, and it offers indie developers an easy way to make an online game without having to worry about server upkeep. This also has the potential bonus that Sony's in charge of when online is cut off for games... sadly I'm guessing publishers like EA or Ubisoft will still use their own servers, but you never know. It'd be nice if Sony had say on when servers were shut down rather than having major publishers make it a surprise.

The other question I have is whether the MMOs coming out with be part of the plan as well. Most MMOs that come out wouldn't normally have a subscription nowadays anyway, but knowing that you have access to all MMOs with the PS+ service as well would be another perk to the unfortunate change.

 

[GonzoGamer]

This is hardly the kind of news that will kill Sony. Does it suck considering PS3 currently doesn't do it? Yes. But let's face it, PS+ is a lot more than just MP access. Free games every month, beta access to new games, full game trials, discounts, cloud saves, and auto system updates...worth it.

Well, not exactly free games. Netflix isn't free movies. My question is, will we still get current big budget games and all that for the same price after they get all the online gamers and MS refugees? If they know people are going to pay anyway, just to play, they may not be okay giving away games they can sell for some hay. Sorry, I was channeling Roadblock there for a sec.

The shame of it is that it was one of the main reasons I got a ps3 over a 360. Christ, you don't think the ps3 is going to incorporate a rrod too, do you? That was the other thing that had me running from the 360...top speed.

 

[PoolCleaningRobot]

The surprisingly positive attitude of this comment thread really shows the good will Sony has earned from their e3 conference. I agree that requiring it kind of sucks but its only for online games. If I wasn't already a ps+ subscriber for the benefit of free games and cloud sync then I wouldn't have gotten it on the ps4 because I never play online. Xbox Gold on the other hand is needed for basic features like using Internet Explorer and they charge it on top of dashboard advertisements

Maybe this kind of charge is actually needed to maintain online servers but I don't know, I never use xbox live so I don't know how its online compares to psn but I hear its "better"

 

[gphjr14]

I don't mind it if it still includes all the perks PS+ offers now.
Sony said not long after PS3 came out that their next console would more than likely require a payed subscription for online play.

Nothing really beats free but if they offer a reliable connection then I don't mind paying $5 a month.

 

[-Dragmire-]

As long as I don't need PS+ to shop on the psn, I'm fine with this. I don't play online.

 

[Viper114]

Well, not exactly free games.

I would think being able to download, play and hold onto a bunch of games without needing to pay anything extra constitutes being "free". It's PS Plus that costs $50 for a year, while the games themselves are given away free of charge. But that's just semantics at this point.

Bottom line is, PS+ is worth it.

 

[gamegod25]

I'm willing to pay for online so long as I feel that I'm getting my monies worth. And with free games every month (and not shovelware either) along with the other stuff I'm happy to shell out $5 a month for PS+

It's still a hell of a lot more appealing than the Xbone.

 

[GonzoGamer]

Well, not exactly free games.

I would think being able to download, play and hold onto a bunch of games without needing to pay anything extra constitutes being "free". It's PS Plus that costs $50 for a year, while the games themselves are given away free of charge. But that's just semantics at this point.

Bottom line is, PS+ is worth it.

Free is free. It's not like you get to keep the games after the subscription expires. Plus is like netflix for games: a monthly fee to get instant access to games. It's a better value than netflix or gamefly (right now at least) but it's not Xmas.

Is it worth it? If you get enough time to play, sure. That's the thing, some people don't have enough time to make use of something like Plus to make it worth anything more than multiplayer access.

 

[Hazy]

$5 for a load of free games every month. That pays for itself.

 

[deadish]

When it's free, people *****. "You get what you pay for HAHAHA!"

Now when it's not free ...

I wonder if the subscription is necessary only if you go through the PSN network ... What about MMOs?

 

[faspxina]

It still sucks.

The reason people aren't that mad about this is because PS+ is known right now for adding great value to your subscription, by giving you freebies. Well, they only give you free stuff because that's how they're selling the service right now, the day you have no other way to enjoy your games but to pay a monthly fee than they don't need to give you free stuff.

 

[sethisjimmy]

Sucks. I don't really consider PS+ worth it right now just based on the fact that you can't choose what goes free and what gets discounted, so the PS+ library right now has only like 2 titles I have actually played. It also looks great on paper, but they typically only add about one AAA title a month for free, so the existing library gets stale extremely fast.
This really isn't justified at all. It's not terrible, it's nowhere near as bad as Xbox Live yet, but there's still absolutely no reason to charge for online play on top of the internet bill one already pays. There's no reason they can't just leave PS+ separate from online play. It's simple money grubbing.

It sucks because this was one of the big advantages Sony had over Xbox this generation, a big feature they could promote was the fact that you don't have to pay for something you're already paying for.

Consoles are doing a great job of making the PC look so good right now.

 

[Th37thTrump3t]

If this means that the online servers will be of higher quality, then call me a convert. Considering the only games I'm really looking forward to next generation is Destiny and Dark Souls 2, which are both going to be multiplatform, there really is nothing that makes me want the Xbone. Microsoft is really fucking up on this one.

 

[BehattedWanderer]

I kinda figured this would happen anyway. As someone who has taken occasional advantage of a three month period of Playstation Plus, it's not a bad service. There's a lot of fun stuff you can get, between whole games and 25-50% off buying price, and that's fine. Needing it to go online, something you know they wanted to do for the PS3 but couldn't implement it part way into its life cycle, is not that big of a deal, seeing as that's been the norm for the 360 since it was the 360, if you see what I mean. Since I'm not that big of a multiplayer guy, this news doesn't break the bank for me, but a Plus subscription is hardly a nuisance, considering the other benefits it provides.

 

[Lightknight]

But doesn't PS+ require a credit card? that's the only thing that worries me, is having to use a credit card, I've always used prepaid credit for the PSN and even used prepaid time for WoW when i used to play.

You can get a PS card somewhere else to use on the PSN. It's what my wife and I use and it's pretty widely available (we pick it up at the grocery store from that gift card kiosk).

I will say that with their network actually making them money, we're likely to see a lot better security from them. Also, if you didn't notice, with the invention of PS+ on the PS3 we saw a dramatic increase in the network performance too. So we stand to have some significant advantages with this move. Basically, the ps4 is competing with microsoft on every front that gamers care about and even exceeding expectations. As I look at every category comparing the two systems I can't help but thinking that microsoft failed here even on the specs alone without regard for DRM and all that crap we didn't want/ask for. You can't be a weaker console with a weaker games catalogue and price your system higher. At least the ps3 was considered a more powerful console back when it released (even though we have since learned that it's ridiculous asset categories all but crippled developers in making games for it).

 

[Oly J]

I've been on PS+ since the service started, so this doesn't effect me much at all, still I understand the annoyance for those it does effect, sure the other bonuses are worth it, but if you're not interested in them I can see how it would be a problem, not for me though, I'm perfectly ready to accept this