By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
SvennoJ on 01 July 2013
Edit Thread
bananaking21 said:
enditall727 said:
 


Yea but it's still not required

 

I do see what you're saying though since the online is tied to PS Plus now


but it is required to play online, thats his point. he is saying we dont want to force the consumers by adding the camera, but they are forcing the consumers to buy PS+ if they want to play online

Flawed analogy.

First of all you are also required to buy the camera if you want to play camera based games.
If you want to play single player only why pay a higher price for the console to subsidize the online infrastructure? If online multiplayer was still free the console would have been at least 499.
Forcing ps+ on you would be only having a 449 option with a year ps+ included.

It sucks that people expect so much from multiplayer that it can't be free anymore. It would be nice if they still left peer-to-peer multiplayer outside the paywall. But I guess that is too much to ask from developers to support both, and might get confusing to consumers.
At least they're leaving the multimedia stuff outside the paywall, and you're only paying for actually using a service.

I rather have it free too, but let's be realistic, nothing is free. What would your preferred option be:
- More expensive console to pay for online infrastructure.
- Charging developers bandwidth fees which restricts demos, fixes, more expensive DLC.
- Games with multiplayer cost $70 or more.
- Online passes.
- Add breaks during online play sessions.