Its great value if you've never played any of those games. I've played 5 of those games and out of the others, I'm only interested in 3 more. So for me personally, $50 a month to play 3 games isn't that great value. Its still much better than terrible games we get with Xbox Live gold though. 

Why talk about "play online value" when this results are based in the PS3? The online is free here.

Problems with the article:
- It uses prices in the PS store to determine the value.
- Maybe you already own/played those games. This brings the value down from the player PoV.
- Maybe you don't like that game/genre. This just brings the value down to zero.

While I see the value in the program, i get really uncomfortable for buying something before knowing what it is.
Even more when i look to PS4 free games. I would be very disappointed with PS+ by now if i only had a PS4.

I'd rather have free online. =/

Is this dude serious? Please tell me he's not.

Yeah, personally I didn't like the games offered (already owned most of the big ones), but there is no denying that there is some tremendous value here.

I paid €80 to watch a football match this year on more than one occasion. I thought that was value for money for an hours entertainment. Nobody in their right mind could say PS Plus isn't an absolute steal for gamers!

1. Who determines what's good? There are people who prefer "silly indies" over AAA games because if they are interested in an AAA game, they it before it's offerered on ps+. ps+  also exposes people to games they never would have given a chance otherwise. 

2. I don't get this point. Surely what's important here is that most ps+ subscribers have a ps4 and most likely a ps3. The majority of ps3 owners don't have ps+  anyway.

3. You don't exxactly own it forever. If it gets damaged, lost, given to a friend who never returns it, etc, it's gone for ever. The same can't be said about digital dowloads. I recently moved to a new country and couldn't take my over 100 ps3 physical copies, but just with my ps3 and a decent internet connection, I can have access to an insane number of games I've received from ps+

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.

That's great for you, but that is not the whole list of PS Plus games given away during 2014.

I paid $50 for $1,349.29. Id take that deal anytime.

There are occasional people who prefer indies over AAA games. But PS+ doesn't have a specific focus on indies. You're arguing that because a small portion of the population might play a game they wouldn't otherwise have played, it is reasonable to simply tally the RRP of all games and determine that to be the value of PS+ for all subscribers.

There is some truth to the notion that a lot of PS+ subscribers are PS4 owners. Rightly or wrongly (and I would argue the studies are dubious), it has been suggested that a large proportion of PS4 owners did not buy a PS3. But as I said, the best value of the program would be drawn from someone who owned all three platforms - in other words a tiny portion of the population.

3. People who move country would be a statistically insignificant portion of PS+ subscribers (I am sure you realize this). Further more, paying $60-100 (depending on country) per year in perpetuity to play your games is not something that can be reasonably compared to the possibility you might accidentaly misplace your entire games collection.

Again, I am not saying PS+ doesn't offer value. I am saying Sony gave nothing away, and that the value listed in the OP is ridiculous.