By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
riderz13371 on 13 December 2014
Edit Thread
starcraft said:
Carl2291 said:
Ka-pi96 said:
Pure cost doesn't represent value though. That could easily have been just a large amount of poor games (I think it has been recently actually).

Are you really gonna argue that $50 for over $1,300 worth of content ranging at 79/78 Meta isnt a good deal?

How can you really argue that it is just a large amount of poor games too, when the average Meta's range from 79/78?

I don't think he is saying it isn't a good deal, I think he is pointing out the ridiculousness of assigning that value and suggesting Sony 'gave it away.'

I believe that to someone who owned a PS3 (probably not someone who owned soley a PS4 or Vita) PS+ was a good deal this year.

But Sony gave nothing away. We PAID for a rental service. A good rental service, yes.

If we threw logic out the window and assumed that Sony did give something away, then that figure would be silly, as many of the games were no good, many were on systems the vast majority of PS3 owners cannot access, and many are available at far cheaper costthan their original RRP (and to own forever at that).

Of course we could go one step further, and point out that Sony's costs were virtually nothing for the dowloads, and then whatever they paid publishers for games, averaged over the number of PS+ users.

Yes, let's throw logic out the window and let you determine that "many of the games were no good". Shit lets throw reading out the window and not look at the OP where he clearly posts that the average monthly metacritic ranking of the games given away on PS Plus was a 79.