By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Puppyroach on 08 August 2013
Edit Thread
the2real4mafol said:
Puppyroach said:
This is really silly, so now people are discussing who gives more or less when you pay? Sony recently announced that they will start requiring PS+ for most multiplayer, yet people still think they are some kind of heroes for not requiring it for the recording?

Do not people understand that these are business decisions? If MS´s strategy works, Sony will follow suit. If, however, Sony´s strategy is succesful, MS will follow closely (like, for example, free games). None of them are "good guys" or "bad guys" which Sony showed by starting to require payments for more of their services. They want to make money to stay in this business and make more games avaliable for us gamers.

And, for anyone complaining about all the money everything costs: it is a lot cheaper to be a gamer today than in the 90´s, you get more for less and a lot better deals all the time. So you chill out and start enjoying the games instead :).

Microsoft has stuff like Skype and Internet Explorer (things that are free elsewhere) behind the Xbox Live paywall alongside livestreaming, Netlfix. MS even tried to put F2P games behind the paywall, but developers rightfully told them where to shove it. As a result, some developers have been turned off by the Xbox One. 

All Sony wants to charge you for is Multiplayer but you get a decent selection of games thrown in too. Everything else on PS4 from cross game chat to F2P, Netflix and now livestreaming don't require PS+ at all. Who knows, we might even get Gaikai included in some form on PS+, so we can play any game from PS1, PS2 or PS3. That would be a steal.

The problem people have with MS is that they try to make money out of even free stuff. It's why BBC iPlayer took so long to get on Xbox 360 because MS wanted even that to require a membership and the BBC refused to accept that. I know multiplayer is a key feature but the rest of the consoles features shouldn't be locked to a paywall as well. 

Yes, and you can therefore get these features for free if you want to, but not integrated to the system like you get with Xbox Live. I am not really even trying to defend their decision, because I do not understand why people are upset with something that is free on a computer.

Yes, multiplayer is a key feature, and it is that feature that both MS and Sony will put behind the paywall next generation. Why do you think such an important feature all of the sudden turned up as exclusive to PS+? On PS+ you also only get to "own" the games you get for free as long as you pay for PS+, whereas on XBL you can keep the games even after your subscription ends. I wouldn´t like if MS went the same route as Sony regarding that feature, but I can understand why Sony made that decision. It has made it possible for them to generate money to invest in more game development, which in turn benefits us as gamers.