It has come to my attention that some people are dissatisfied with Nintendo's online features and use that as an argument for why they should remain free, and why the competition's offerings should still have a fee.

I am now giving you the opportunity to tell me why a $50-60 fee per year (ultimately adding up to $250-600 by the generation's end) is justified in Sony's and Microsoft's case, by allowing you to list the online features that you pay for- and wish for Nintendo to implement so that their free online will actually pose as a benefit over the competition.

But... you get "free games" with PS plus!

Dem free games. Yeah, not free technically but dirt cheap nonetheless. It really pays off when you happen to own PS3, PS4 and PS Vita.

The extra games I get to play I normally wouldn't spend money on, or have missed completely. PS+ has given me plenty of great experiences next to discounts.
Online gaming, I guess when GT7 comes out, not worth $50 a year on it's own.

I get approximately 5-6 games per month across PS3, Vita and PS4. Just one month's game offering is enough to justify the £35 yearly cost of PS+. I'll leave the other ~60 games from the remaining 11 months out of the equation :)

I guess its cause of the Free*********************** Games

I personally don't like mandatory paid online cause online should always be free... Steam does it while having much better sales than PS+ and Gold specially during summer at the Steam Summer Sale where 1000's of games goes on sale with no yearly payment required... I get the whole, Ps+ and Gold = free games and thats great but I hate the fact that its mandatory cause lets say you want to play a game that has online and you don't care for Sony's or MS's games, well tough luck, you have to pay for it anyway

Sure, $5/month doesn't sound like anything and the value is great but when steam offers better sales and services for free, its just like come on... If only it wasn't mandatory... I paid for the game so why do I have to pay extra for playing online? It makes no sense to me... Ps+ did it right on the ps3, I just hate their implementation on the Ps4 to make it mandatory

And if Nintendo does it, well shit, least they have great local multiplayer games

I've never spent more than $30 a year on PS+.

Personally, I don't even care that much about online gaming. I have PS+ because it gives me incredible value, both with the offered games and the awesome discounts. Quite honestly, it's been worth the price in discounts alone.

As for Nintendo, the lack of an account system really turns me off. They definitely need to get up to speed on that.

I got a year of ps plus for $20. Black Friday sale at Amazon.com. Having a PS3, PS4, and a Vita makes PS plus ver attractive. I have XBLG but that was a gift. I would't have paid for that.

With PS+, you pay less for more by getting free games!

This is exactly why I pay for PS+ though. Means I have an awesome backlog of games for when I need something new to play or Im low on money and its only $70 a year.