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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - PSN alone almost generated the same sales than all of Nintendo in 2015

outlawauron on 25 April 2016
Darwinianevolution said:
Kerotan said:

That leads me to a big question.  Will Nintendo start charging for online? 

God, I hope not. Not only it would alienate its current and future fanbase (blocking the multiplayer to titles like Pokemon, MarioKart, Smash, Splatoon...), they would crash and burn without the same discounts/services offered by PS+ or XboxLive, and that needs massive 3rd party support. Plus, charging for online multiplayer is theft, plain and simple.

It's coming though. Nintendo is going to do as they move into the digital age and develop their online options. Charging for online mutliplayer is scummy, but that money is going to improving and developing the online services. It's not like Steam where each games uses P2P networks through each individual games matchmaking. That requires zero infrastructure on Valve's part.



"We'll toss the dice however they fall,
And snuggle the girls be they short or tall,
Then follow young Mat whenever he calls,
To dance with Jak o' the Shadows."

Check out MyAnimeList and my Game Collection. Owner of the 5 millionth post.

Around the Network
Swordmasterman on 25 April 2016
KLXVER said:
Teeqoz said:

You don't, no.

I thought so.

Some Online Only games,  are Exceptions for PS +, Sony, let the people play without sign the PS Plus.



Intrinsic on 25 April 2016
Mar1217 said:
So ? It's nothing surprising when you know there's million of people who are willing to pay a forced online service by Sony ...

talk about being salty. My take is if people are paying for the service then they must think it's worth it right? and btw, you do realize you get A LOT more than just online gaming right? Hell, I thought it was worth it for the free games and discounts and paid for it in full before they even bundled on online play. that's says a lot about the value of the service. 

At some point in 2014, I could use or be around my PS4 for 5 months.and I still paid for the service just to keep getting the games. 



TheBlackNaruto on 25 April 2016

This thread was quite the read! Anyway good job for Sony. Glad PSN is helping them make a profit. "did they send MS a thank you letter" Kowen you are good I am surprised no one caught that lol.



The absence of evidence is NOT the evidence of absence...

PSN: StlUzumaki23

The_Yoda on 25 April 2016
Teeqoz said:
KLXVER said:

Surely you dont need PS+ for Netflix?

You don't, no.

Are you sure about that . I have 2 PS4's . I had a regular PS account, Only the PRIMARY PS4 tied to my account had access. I could have jumped through the hoops of swapping which one was my primary PS4 or buy a PS+ subscription.



Around the Network
Teeqoz on 25 April 2016
The_Yoda said:
Teeqoz said:

You don't, no.

Are you sure about that . I have 2 PS4's . I had a regular PS account, Only the PRIMARY PS4 tied to my account had access. I could have jumped through the hoops of swapping which one was my primary PS4 or buy a PS+ subscription.

Then clearly it has nothing to do with PS+, and it's got to do with which PS4 is your primary console.



The_Yoda on 25 April 2016
Teeqoz said:
The_Yoda said:

Are you sure about that . I have 2 PS4's . I had a regular PS account, Only the PRIMARY PS4 tied to my account had access. I could have jumped through the hoops of swapping which one was my primary PS4 or buy a PS+ subscription.

Then clearly it has nothing to do with PS+, and it's got to do with which PS4 is your primary console.

If it "has nothing to do with PS+" as you say then why is swapping primaries the only work around outside of a PS+ subscription .... With PS+ I can now log-in to either machine and access streaming no swapping of primaries neccesary.



Teeqoz on 25 April 2016
The_Yoda said:

If it "has nothing to do with PS+" as you say then why is swapping primaries the only work around outside of a PS+ subscription .... With PS+ I can now log-in to either machine and access streaming no swapping of primaries neccesary.

Right, but now you are saying something that's substantially different from what your original comment was:

The_Yoda said:

if i really think about say watching netflix on my PS4 or Hulu+ then i get a little salty.  I pay for PS+, I pay for the service, then I pay for the internet connection ... locking TV streaming behind PS+ is kinda bullshit.

...



The_Yoda on 25 April 2016
Teeqoz said:
The_Yoda said:

If it "has nothing to do with PS+" as you say then why is swapping primaries the only work around outside of a PS+ subscription .... With PS+ I can now log-in to either machine and access streaming no swapping of primaries neccesary.

Right, but now you are saying something that's substantially different from what your original comment was:

The_Yoda said:

if i really think about say watching netflix on my PS4 or Hulu+ then i get a little salty.  I pay for PS+, I pay for the service, then I pay for the internet connection ... locking TV streaming behind PS+ is kinda bullshit.

...

True I suppose.  It's either a hassle or a subscription and that's after shelling out $800 for 2 PS4's (Destiny and Battlefront editions). It still makes me a little salty that's why I try not to think about it.

But I admit my original post should have included the detail in my final posts. Sorry all for the confussion. I was busy at the time of the first post.



arcaneguyver on 25 April 2016

The salt levels got higher in this thread than I had anticipated! I and my friends have PS+ for practically everything but online play. Different strokes for different folks.