Machiavellian said:
LOL, did you even click on the link he provided. You just accepted someone else opinion without even verifying it yourself. Also if you click the link you would seen even the developer called their MP, Peer to Peer. There is absolutly nothing in that link that shows that there is any Sony servers that are involved with Uncharted 4 MP. Even if Sony provided dedicated servers for UC4 it would not have any meaning to PSN as a service. It would be for one game, out of thousands. Another point is that PSN does not do anything for 3rd party games from the likes of Activision, EA etc. First party games may use dedicated servers and Sony has done this before but it has nothing to do with PS+ or the service. What you are confusing is PS+/ PSN service with what individual games may or may have for MP. The question still stands, exactly what does PSN do for MP online games where it needs to be put behind a paid service. What cost is Sony absorbing for MP online play that it justified being behind a paywall. If you have no answer for this question then the move to put Online Play behind a pay wall was strictly a money grabbing move. Not sure why people cannot accept this fact, its as if you all forget that Sony is a business and they will do things for money whether or not it benifit the customer. |
I guess you have to improve your reading... he says that the link he provided is made by guys that makes the same confusion as you.
He explained quite well that the P2P needs the dedicated server for migration in case a host leaves and manage things. And they calling it P2P doesn't mean it's what you understand as P2P it's most that they don't consider fully dedicated... several users in the past even debunked the usefullness of dedicated servers.
It's not a question of accepting or not, it's a fact that you think others should think like you. 21+M users are ok with paying for the online and not complaining, you think they are wrong and should complain because you feel like it is a money grabber.

duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363
Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994
Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."







