It's not a question of money, most of the games I want for the PS4 are single player, and I have a perfectly good PC to play multiplayer. It's a question of practises. If we as consumers send the message that online fees are not a big deal, they will keep doing it, and worse, other companies will start to consider them too. When the 360 was the only one charging for fees, people were fine with it, and it sold around the same numbers as the PS3. When Sony saw this, they charged for their online services too, and people were too hyped for the PS4 to notice, or even care about it.Now the two big home consoles now have online fees, and they can charge whatever they want, because they know the other one won't drop the model either.

If the trend continues, what's to stop Nintendo from charging for their services too? Unlikely, but it's a scary possibility. Or even worse, what if EA, Ubi and Activision start charging for their online in their PC games? First with the older games (with excuses like keeping the servers alive) and then starting with their newer games. Imagine every PC CoD fan paying 4,99€ per month to play their game, all that sweet money going to Activision directly instead of Sony/MS? The same with other ones. It's going to get worse and worse. And people just accept it.

It's not a question of money, most of the games I want for the PS4 are single player, and I have a perfectly good PC to play multiplayer. It's a question of practises. If we as consumers send the message that online fees are not a big deal, they will keep doing it, and worse, other companies will start to consider them too. When the 360 was the only one charging for fees, people were fine with it, and it sold around the same numbers as the PS3. When Sony saw this, they charged for their online services too, and people were too hyped for the PS4 to notice, or even care about it.Now the two big home consoles now have online fees, and they can charge whatever they want, because they know the other one won't drop the model either.

If the trend continues, what's to stop Nintendo from charging for their services too? Unlikely, but it's a scary possibility. Or even worse, what if EA, Ubi and Activision start charging for their online in their PC games? First with the older games (with excuses like keeping the servers alive) and then starting with their newer games. Imagine every PC CoD fan paying 4,99€ per month to play their game, all that sweet money going to Activision directly instead of Sony/MS? The same with other ones. It's going to get worse and worse. And people just accept it.

FYI, I'm not paying for PlayStation Plus now, and I'm not planning on paying for it when I get my Pro.  Also, I'm nore of a single player gamer.  I personally believe that you should only pay to play online when it's an MMO or in game purchases.

Not paying for PS+ doesn't change the thing that you still have to pay some fee to access some content you bought. Imagine if you play The Last of Us or Doom 4. Both games you play mostly for the single player, great solo experiences, and you enjoy them fully without even getting to the online portion. But you still paid for their multiplayer, maybe a 10% or 15% of the 60€ went to the multiplayer, but you still have no access to content you paid for. And that keeps piling up, game after game, and at the end of the gen you have quite an important amount of money spent on something you can access unless you pay some more. It's ransom, give us money oryou won't be able of use part of the game you paid for.

And that's without going to multiplayer focused games. Without PS+, Overwatch, PvZ and the rest of them are basically thin air. A cup holder, and if you bought it digital, even less.

Again, if it was a problem with multiplayer in general, this wouldn't be an issue, but the fact you can't access the content you bought is what really urks me. And this is just going to go worse and worse.

Ok, I see where you're coming from.  And what I'm about to say doesn't excuse what's being done.  As we know, most new games retail for $60 new.  I can see where both single player and multi player contents are on the disk, but someone such as myself can only access the single player content because I have no interest in multi player.  But the publisher/developer probably would have charged $60 anyway if only single player content alone was on the disc.  In this case (but I suspect there are other cases), I honestly don't see it being an issue.