For the most part the games I download as part of my PSN+ membership are games I would not have bought at retail or games I would only buy used once they were less than $20. So nobody is missing any money from me except maybe the makers of Dragon's Dogma: Dark Arisen because I was planning to buy that at some point.

That being said I think it balances out when you consider all the things I've bought on sale from PSN.

The bottom line is: I don't think a developer who makes a game like Bioshock Infinite with a retail price of 60 bucks has any interest in making a mobile game that sells for 99 cents that someone plays for 5 minutes and then gets bored with.

.

No.
The PC Free to play game and microtransaction strategy on consoles is going to hurt it severely. Its going to nickel and dime the shit out of gamers to the point where they buy less of those types of game because more and more of them are growing in abundance.

Yes, exactly that spoiling is never good. Gamers are spoiled by a lot of things and they react very aggressively if someone takes that away. Take Games with Gold. It's pretty much a laughing stock, not because the games are bad but because Sony spoiled everyone with fresh and acclaimed games.

Usually there are giant backlashes from the gamer community if a company decides to take just a tiny bit away or decides to charge a cent more for something. Because gamers are entitled little shits this could get dangerous for Sony.

Never had that problem. Some Vita games (not only PS+ games, but also other PSN games and retail games) try to connect to PSN to get the newest high scores or daily challenges (for example: Rayman Legends), but if you abort that try, the game works just fine without the connection.

Most of my games on my PS3 were free due to PS+, which is probably not good for the developers. I'll also admit that a few of those games were games that I was considering on purchasing... however most I wouldn't had even touched. I was going to purchase Brothers, but that's free next month. Infinite will be nice to own on two systems I guess...

Is it a "crack" to the industry... No, because people are still spending money on games. Personally. 2013 was my most expensive year in terms of gaming related purchases.

I also got a 1 year membership for free as part of the console bundle I bought earlier this year, so thanks Sony! The 360 was my favorite and more preferred console last gen, but the short experience that I've had so far with the PS3, mainly due to PS+ has contributed to me highly considering the PS4 when I pick up another next gen console.

It already brought down the industry, it justified a subscription for online multiplayer.....something you guys honorably stood against.....or used to.

its just an example. i just made up the numbers.

Every action has a reaction. I see that the PS3 model of free giving is not going to continue to PS4 due to the sheer lack of games to give for free.

Brothers was indeed the case that ignited this thought in my head. I spent exactly 0 euros on games for the past 2 years, since the concept has hit my mind. Yet, I've played more than 20 games and have an equal library of Vita games waiting for my reluctance on buying the system to fade away. 

If games always stayed at $60 for years with no other options of acquiring like PS+ or renting them then I would simply own a lot less games. If anything price drops and these services have made me play and spend more on games.