By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Microsoft - Microsoft Responds To 'Games With Gold' Not Being As Good As 'Playstation Plus'

FlamingWeazel on 23 January 2014
Chris Hu said:

Your are derailing it by posting something that is barely comprehensible.


lol, man relax. My post was simple to read and on topic, unlike your personal attacks.



Around the Network
Chris Hu on 23 January 2014
FlamingWeazel said:
Chris Hu said:

Your are derailing it by posting something that is barely comprehensible.


lol, man relax. My post was simple to read and on topic, unlike your personal attacks.


Simple to read if you have dyslexia.

Moderated,

-Mr Khan



Nem on 23 January 2014
BMaker11 said:
Nem said:
 


Hmm... not everyone is so impatient as you. I play old games all the time. I have quite the long back catalog so im not in a rush to play games as soon as they come out. I actually played Uncharted one last year for the first time. :)

I like having my own selectiong aswell. Sometimes i do go back and play some of them. For example i got Xenogears on my PSP and i intend to go through it again. Sometimes i look at Suikoden V and Grandia 2 and 3 on the PS2 and might go for a spin. I try to avoid it cause i got lots of games to finish and i cant get side-tracked but i still have all my old console and my favorite games around. The games i keep follow a strict 2 point rule wich is: Would i play this again, or is this so special i really want to keep it? So, most of the games i keep are games i will play again at some point (if i ever get that backcatalog done! lol).

so, yeah... renting really doesnt work for me. I'm building a collection, i dont care so much about only playing whats hot at any given time. Doing that also gives you more perspective on what i really good and what is just hyped.

Well, just remember that PS+'s free games are merely an incentive to subscribe. You can still build a catalogue of games that you buy and own and play many years from now. PS+ doesn't restrict you from going to the store and buying a game. It just gives you the chance to add games to your selection that you A. otherwise wouldn't have bought, B. didn't have the money to buy at the time or C. just didn't know about before. That's not a detriment to your selection of games. That'd be like me promoting Nike because their shoes are on sale, and you say you like having your own selection....when nobody is stopping you from buying a pair of Reeboks. And if we're comparing Games with Gold with PS+ purely on selection, there's no way you can say GwG is better. Yea, you can keep Iron Brigade and Gears of War 1, but I'd rather experience newer games for free, than keep old ones that I've already played a long time ago. And looking at how you refer to Suikoden, Grandia, and Xenogears, it looks like you have a preference to physical copies, anyway, so in that regard, PS+ and GwG don't even matter.

Yeah, i know. I was comparing the two wich was what the topic was aluding to. For me, Gold would be a better deal, IF i subbed to one.
Though chances are i wont ever sub to PS+ just like i didnt sub for Gold. I dont play online enough to justify paying a subscription. I do my online gaming on the PC where its free.

And another detriment of PS+ is it would make my backcatalog go completely out of control (cause they add so many games to the service with Vita, PS3 and PS4) if Sony were to add to it at ltheir leasure. I like to finish my games. I always feel bad when i dont.



Mr Puggsly on 23 January 2014
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Microsoft owes their community so much more for all the nickel and diming.


MS doesn't owe anything. Nobody was forced to buy Xbox products.

Sony fucked up for much of the 7th gen and that forced them to be more competitive. MS should offer more to compete with Sony, not because they owe it.



Recently Completed: 
River City: Rival Showdown for 3DS (3/5) - River City: Tokyo Rumble for 3DS (4/5) - Zelda: BotW for Wii U (5/5) - Zelda: BotW for Switch (5/5) - Zelda: Link's Awakening for Switch (4/5) - Rage 2 for X1X (4/5) - Rage for 360 (3/5) - Streets of Rage 4 for X1/PC (4/5) - Gears 5 for X1X (5/5) - Mortal Kombat 11 for X1X (5/5) - Doom 64 for N64 (emulator) (3/5) - Crackdown 3 for X1S/X1X (4/5) - Infinity Blade III - for iPad 4 (3/5) - Infinity Blade II - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Infinity Blade - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Wolfenstein: The Old Blood for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Origins for X1 (3/5) - Uncharted: Lost Legacy for PS4 (4/5) - EA UFC 3 for X1 (4/5) - Doom for X1 (4/5) - Titanfall 2 for X1 (4/5) - Super Mario 3D World for Wii U (4/5) - South Park: The Stick of Truth for X1 BC (4/5) - Call of Duty: WWII for X1 (4/5) -Wolfenstein II for X1 - (4/5) - Dead or Alive: Dimensions for 3DS (4/5) - Marvel vs Capcom: Infinite for X1 (3/5) - Halo Wars 2 for X1/PC (4/5) - Halo Wars: DE for X1 (4/5) - Tekken 7 for X1 (4/5) - Injustice 2 for X1 (4/5) - Yakuza 5 for PS3 (3/5) - Battlefield 1 (Campaign) for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Syndicate for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: MW Remastered for X1 (4/5) - Donkey Kong Country Returns for 3DS (4/5) - Forza Horizon 3 for X1 (5/5)

BMaker11 on 23 January 2014
Buckwheat said:
BMaker11 said:
Nem said:

Weeeelll... if what i heard about you beeing able to keep the games even if you finish your subscription is true, then yes it is better than Playstation +.

The difference beeing Gold will actually give you free games, while PS+ just lets you rent them. I rank property has more valuable than limited ownership. But, the renting one does offer better titles. But, that makes sense given how the systems work.

When was the last time you went back and played a really old game that you've beaten? Everyone barks out about "renting" games but seriously, after beating Uncharted 1, for example, has anyone decided 5 years later that they want to play it again? I know when I was done with that game...I just sold it because I'd rather have money than let it sit on my shelf, since I wasn't playing it anymore.

Yea, it's better to "own" the game, but let's be practical here. Everybody that's played a game, beaten it over and over and over again, isn't gonna want the game 4-5 years from now, so to trivialize PS+ because you're just "renting" the game seems kinda silly

And let's just say you do want to play a really old game, but your subscription is up. In 4-5 years, imagine what other games are gonna be free on PS+, which would justify resubscribing.....then you get your old game back.

Hope you weren't on campus the other day!  It was a terrible thing that happened.  I live in Lafayette, so I know this type of thing doesn't happen often around here.

Oh, no, I graduated in 2011 (hence BMaker11. I'm so clever =/ ) but I still go up every now and then. I was really freaked out, though, because I have friends that live in the apartments right across the street from EE and others that live in a house by Delts. And two of my friends were in the building when the shooting happened (he was on the floor above and on the same side of the building as where the murder happened, the other one didn't tell me what room, exactly, she was in). And with all the news going back and forth about a possibility of multiple shooters....I basically texted everyone I know. Luckily, many of them immediately posted to Facebook saying they were ok. 



Around the Network
BMaker11 on 23 January 2014
Nem said:
BMaker11 said:
Nem said:
 


Hmm... not everyone is so impatient as you. I play old games all the time. I have quite the long back catalog so im not in a rush to play games as soon as they come out. I actually played Uncharted one last year for the first time. :)

I like having my own selectiong aswell. Sometimes i do go back and play some of them. For example i got Xenogears on my PSP and i intend to go through it again. Sometimes i look at Suikoden V and Grandia 2 and 3 on the PS2 and might go for a spin. I try to avoid it cause i got lots of games to finish and i cant get side-tracked but i still have all my old console and my favorite games around. The games i keep follow a strict 2 point rule wich is: Would i play this again, or is this so special i really want to keep it? So, most of the games i keep are games i will play again at some point (if i ever get that backcatalog done! lol).

so, yeah... renting really doesnt work for me. I'm building a collection, i dont care so much about only playing whats hot at any given time. Doing that also gives you more perspective on what i really good and what is just hyped.

Well, just remember that PS+'s free games are merely an incentive to subscribe. You can still build a catalogue of games that you buy and own and play many years from now. PS+ doesn't restrict you from going to the store and buying a game. It just gives you the chance to add games to your selection that you A. otherwise wouldn't have bought, B. didn't have the money to buy at the time or C. just didn't know about before. That's not a detriment to your selection of games. That'd be like me promoting Nike because their shoes are on sale, and you say you like having your own selection....when nobody is stopping you from buying a pair of Reeboks. And if we're comparing Games with Gold with PS+ purely on selection, there's no way you can say GwG is better. Yea, you can keep Iron Brigade and Gears of War 1, but I'd rather experience newer games for free, than keep old ones that I've already played a long time ago. And looking at how you refer to Suikoden, Grandia, and Xenogears, it looks like you have a preference to physical copies, anyway, so in that regard, PS+ and GwG don't even matter.

Yeah, i know. I was comparing the two wich was what the topic was aluding to. For me, Gold would be a better deal, IF i subbed to one.
Though chances are i wont ever sub to PS+ just like i didnt sub for Gold. I dont play online enough to justify paying a subscription. I do my online gaming on the PC where its free.

And another detriment of PS+ is it would make my backcatalog go completely out of control (cause they add so many games to the service with Vita, PS3 and PS4) if Sony were to add to it at ltheir leasure. I like to finish my games. I always feel bad when i dont.





bucky1965 on 23 January 2014

Funny thing is neither one is better than the other. It's the usual I like (x) over argument. My choice is better than yours.



PenguinZ on 23 January 2014
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Microsoft owes their community so much more for all the nickel and diming.


For what? They provided the good quality online experience last generation...



Current gaming platforms - Switch, PlayStation 4, Xbox One, Wii U, New 3DS, PC

Pemalite on 23 January 2014
FlamingWeazel said:

Renting games that are recent and the quality of infinite then getting free old games you can buy for 2 bucks.. PS plus craps all over live gold games. Also why would your sub run out? Once you sub you just keep resubbing, plus is worth it alone and it's mandatory for ps4. You can't trade your digital games so being able to keep them if for some bizarre reason you decide to not sub, means squat. Especially when the quality of games on plsu destroy ms weak offerings.


That's all subjective.

The problem with the "renting" scheme on the Playstation 3 is that... Eventually it will come to an end, you will loose your entire library, it's essentially a form of DRM, nothing lasts forever.
And when that happens, Xbox users will still be able to pull their consoles out in several decades time and play some old classics, Playstation users will have nothing.

To some, that's worth sticking with Games with Gold and is the sole reason why I have kept up my subscription.

As for the quality of games, again. - That's also very subjective.
Everyone has differing opinions on what constitutes a quality game, millions flock to Call of Duty, but I personally don't associate that game/franchise with quality, that doesn't mean it's not a quality title however, millions find it enjoyable.

Alas I still consider Steam as the benchmark that Xbox Live and the Playstation Network needs to reach, it is so far ahead of either networks in many aspects.

Basically...
PSN
* Larger quantities of games. (Subjectively better, differs on a per-person basis.)
* Games are guarenteed to only be temporary.

Xbox Live:
* Less quantities of games. (Subjectively better games.)
* Yours forever.

Steam:
* Completely free.
* Free games (That are subjectively better than it's nearest competitors.)
* May/May not be yours forever, differs on a per-game basis.




www.youtube.com/@Pemalite

J_Allard on 23 January 2014
Xenostar said:

1 year.

errr I don't think so. Unless I am mistaken on the dates, PS+ launched mid 2010 and the Instant Game Collection launched mid 2012. Either way even 1 year makes my point for me. But I am pretty sure I am right. Games with Gold is not even a year old yet.

Another thing to remember is PS+ on PS3 kind of has to give out more games because the games are the absolute main reason to use the service on PS3. It's how they get you to pay. XBL on the other hand, Games with Gold is not the reason to use it on 360, it's online play. MS doesn't need to put as much value into it because the value is there in other areas.

This is why on PS4 you've seen no retail PS+ games yet and the only retail game they have announced as part of the service isn't even a real game it's a "PS+ Edition" demo of the game. Sony no longer needs to put as much value into PS+ as it's now a requirement on the PS4 to play online. It will be interesting to see what happens with each service now on both platforms.