it;s still a free rental.  While I agree it's silly to lose it when your subscription runs out, it does make sense from a business perspective and it's still a free rental.  you could download it, play it, get the trophies, and never touch it again (as I'm sure most do), which is fine for people who aren't collectors (like myself.)  as long as you're just looking for something to play and not something to own, it's a fantastic deal.  

It's all in perspective; how you look at it has everything to do with what you feel about the deal. 

Nintendoland for me.

how is it a free rental if i only get it with ps+? i can play for free so i pay for ps+ for such things and if i pay for ps+ to get as examples games for "free", i pay 50 dollar per year to play "free" games and maybe get some other stuff.

to me i justify my xbl gold like that.... psn+ is saab 900 on which you get liftime free gas and xbl gold is an aston martin db9 on which you have to pay premium gas to work.... if i can afford it i'll go with the aston martin even if bottom line they do the same go from A to B.....

/thread

oh i never pay for my xbl gold more than 35 a year... when i have to pay for it.... it's what a beer less a month at the pub.... not even a question i ask myself....

Well, you get to pay TWICE  for Netflix streaming service, any other device you just have to have a Netflix sub. So thats pretty cool.  Also lots of sweet ads on the Xbox dashboard are available if you arent gaming.  

i didn't say anything about playing your older games (edit: ok i started with that lol)... i said, i get games on ps+ which i played already if i really like them or which i don't really care about because i would have played them then.

i said you don't really own them because then it's like lovefilm. maybe cheaper but it's like that and i did never see someone saying he owns lovefilm movies/games

for me, it's a better idea to buy used games you really want (which makes no sense to me because like i said, i would have already played them) and sell them if you played them some weeks/months later. you will have maybe higher costs (but not much) but then you played 10 games you could choose and not 10 games you got from sony.

I don't even know why some people are trying so hard to compare them, they are not the same. Ps+ is more a game service while xbl gold is more a network service. Still, I'm going to laugh when sony announces payed online play ( 75% sure they will. Makes me wonder what the excuses about how bad xbl gold is will be.

This shouldn't be approached in a PSN+ versus XBL framework. It should be approached regarding "Is it good for games/gamers?"

For me as a gamer, today, it's a great short term deal. I get a bunch of games for the price of a rental. It's ok for Sony short term as well, as they're sure to sign up a bunch of new peeps this month. And it's ok for the devs/pubs of these catalog greatest hits-type of games. Sony's paying them a flat rate to get those licenses. But it depends on how much Sony is paying them as to whether it's a good deal.

But in the long run, is it good?

Consumers used to paying so little for games become reluctant to spend full price on games. We've already seen the impact of Steam and iOS and piracy and filesharing, etc. on the bottom lines of the industry. At what point does our unwillingness to pay $60 Day one become our unwillingness to then not pay $40 3-4 weeks after launch, and then say, well I'll wait another month for $30, or 3 months for $20 or 6 months for PSN+. Obviously big games like COD or Halo or the evergreen Mario franchises don't drop as quickly and/or have the fans to snap them up early. But it becomes that much easier to wait and not take the risk on new IP, on unusual games, on niche games. And we see more developers going out of business or being swallowed whole by the Sony/MS/Ubi/EA's of the world.

For Sony, do people play through 3 or 4 or 5 of the PSN+ titles and then just wait for the next month? I know full well that Just Cause 2 can suck you in for hours and hours. It's that much easier for me now to say, I think I'll skip buying God of War combo pack or a PSN full-price title or risk $40 to see if I like Dark Souls. Is this really good for them in the long run? Yes, they get $5 a month form people, but they're still having to pay the devs/pubs for the games and pay for the bandwidth to support downloads, network support, payment processing, etc. etc. The profit margin there is likely not as high as people buying retail discs and giving Sony direct royalties.

They must have the numbers and find them strong enough to give it a whirl, but it's a slippery slope into being forced to not take risks as a dev/pub, having no margin for error. For the bargain basement prices to really work, you need a really huge base audience in terms of market share, like iOS or Steam enjoy. It's why PSN and XBLA only discounts a handful of the thousands of titles available each month. Otherwise it puts new content that ISN'T mine craft or a sequel at a huge disadvantage and you lose platform sales or exclusivity or devs/pubs wanting to publish on your platform.

It's a good short-term fix, and I know I'm enjoying it, but how long can it go and how great of an idea it is remains to be seen. (And I will say, it'll take a month or two to see if the quality of titles is as high as this first extended batch.)

And if you've read this far, here's a cookie. And take advantage of the deal for Space Marine. Well worth a play-through!

I primarily game on my Xbox but I'll admit I don't like paying for Live. I rarely play online as it is. Though I don't like paying for XBL, Xbox is my console of preference so I do it anyways to unlock the full experience. I do however keep my PS3 around for some exclusive titles and soon, FFXIV. I don't see why it's such a big deal when people go for what they like.

I've seen people insult others for willingly paying for Live/PS+. What kind of immature behavior is that?

You will laugh if PSN starts charging for online gaming...but tell me this. Will you cry if MS makes online gaming free?