Partner Nintendo 3DS Central Social

PSN+ Mandatory For Online Multiplayer

Demon_Skeith

Demon_Skeith

Administrator
Staff member
Administrator
87,213
2007
4,414
Awards
30
Credits
27,402
Steal Penalty
You're Rich Money Bags Award
Profile Music
Among all the glory Sony shine tonight, there was a bit of a dark lining. Starting with the PS4 PSN+ will be required for online play. News on this is still murky but it sounds like PSN+ will cost about $5 a month and will offer the same great PSN+ benefits and plus more.

To anyone who has PSN+ on the PS3, that will carry over to the PS4. No idea if it still remains on your PS3 afterwards though.


This will be updated when sony issues a official announcement.
 
I do hope they go back and change this. Especially since PSN being free was one of the things that really set the PS3 apart from the 360. Having the option to play online with your friends for free was great. And it was really a major selling point. 

Now sure PS+ offers some great stuff  (free games each month, early access to betas, discounts on content, etc... ) but it feels like they're walling off something that made PS3 great. 
 
I definitely does not cost $600 to make. They would be idiots if it was. It's probably about $400 to $450.

Also who cares? They give you free shit.
 
They did confirm that with one PS+ subscription, you have access to all of PS+'s benefits across the Playstation Universe including Vita, PS3, and PS4.

I hope there aren't many people upset at the idea of paying for the PSN. Just because something was free originally doesn't mean you now -deserve- it.

Business are allowed to change their pricing model to stay well within the "profitable" zone so they can afford to create new and interesting features, games, and opportunities for their customers - at least, that's what I think. :) 

If they are willing to work with me as a gamer and listen to my needs for used games and no Skynet-style monitoring, I can part with $5 a month to use their services. They give you a TON of stuff to offset the cost as well. 
 
I'm not really that bothered with this change.
I mean sure it's a bit annoying but when you consider how much benefits PS+ get's you it's pretty easy to justify a subscription.

Espically when we compare it to Microsoft Membership.
So long as Sony uses the mandatory subscription for online to improve their server I see absolutely no downside to this change at all.

That being said It's 10$ cheaper then Xbox Live, gives you free games every month, gives you discounts, free exclusive demo and a ton more features.
 
I heard neither the Xbox One or PS4 will be selling at a loss so that puts the covering costs thing out of the equation.

I think this was inevitable and really it isn't too bad considering the amount of free games and extras you get. The benefits far outweigh the drawbacks. 
 
It's too bad that it's now like that, because if it was free like in the PS3, the PS4 would be the perfect console, no discussion about that.
But yeah, seeing how they are they are asking only 399$ for the console, i think that it's a fair deal.

Also free games each month, discounts, avatars and themes. It's a good deal!
 
After paying $5 a month for Xbox live this is not bad news at all. At least with Playstation Plus you get lots of free games and stuff. This is a small price to pay when you factor in what your getting for the price. Online is like a whole different game so paying a small price in order to make the game re playability better and more entertaining I have nothing to be upset about. 
 
JaneLaw said:
They did confirm that with one PS+ subscription, you have access to all of PS+'s benefits across the Playstation Universe including Vita, PS3, and PS4.

I hope there aren't many people upset at the idea of paying for the PSN. Just because something was free originally doesn't mean you now -deserve- it.

Business are allowed to change their pricing model to stay well within the "profitable" zone so they can afford to create new and interesting features, games, and opportunities for their customers - at least, that's what I think. :)

If they are willing to work with me as a gamer and listen to my needs for used games and no Skynet-style monitoring, I can part with $5 a month to use their services. They give you a TON of stuff to offset the cost as well. 
Click to expand...
Exactly.

Sony's Playstation division has always had trouble turning a profit, so this is a logical step forward considering the relatively low cost of the console. For those of us already paying for PS+, it's no skin off our backs, and for those of you who aren't, why not? Even now you can make back that $50 a year (or $60 if you pay monthly) just by downloading two or three of the free games they offer, and there is SO much more than just a handful of free titles with the service. It was a great move by Sony in the first place, and with what they are offering on the PS4, seems perfectly reasonable. 

And it's important to note that it is not a full on paywall like that with Xbox live. If you don't subscribe to PS+, you will still be able to watch Netflix, Hulu+, etc. on the system. Try doing that right now on a 360. You may just curse with rage.
 
I immediately signed up for Playstation plus as soon as I hear about it after the 2010 E3. I have no plans to cancel my subscription so by them making online mandatory it will barely affect me.

However, I am disappointed. When I first got the Playstation it was because having free online was such a huge pull factor. When I first decided to get Playstation plus it was because I had a little bit extra disposable income. Unfortunately, they got me hooked. Now, half of my games are downloaded from Playstation plus. 

On the plus side, I'm glad they decided not to put video services that are online behind Playstion Plus. That's always been really illogical and I have no idea why Microsoft insists on keeping it. If Microsoft keeps other services like this behind a paywall I can see why it must be such a pain to have to renew your live.
 
Not that big a deal. I'm already paying for PS+ JUST for the Vita games. No issue as long as Plus remains an amazing service. If they start getting lazy with their "free" game offerings, though, I'm out.
 
This is the one negative thing to have come from Sony E3's conference and to be honest compared to Microsoft it's just a tiny drop in the pond. The pros of the PS4 outweigh the cons of the Xbox so that this small negative thing is something I can overlook. As long as PS+ stays an incredible deal (like it is for the PS3) I will be happy. However if they misuse, as Microsoft did with the Xbox 360... I will be a sad panda. 
 
Well, I can't call this a good thing if it's true, but I suppose I would get PSN+ anyway if it has a lot to offer. They can also continue to make more improvements to the service if they get a lot of subscribers. Free online multiplayer was always one thing I appreciated about the PS3, but I can't blame Sony for making this decision.
 
I must say that we all should have seen the monthly subscription coming! I really doubt it was that much of a surprise for anyone seeing as the service was great and is well worth paying 5$ per month. I really do not mind paying the fee however many others do and PS will lose many customers due to this.

-Paul
 
I don't agree with this at all as the main reason I still use my PS3 over the Xbox is the free online gaming as I can't be bother to give Microsoft more of my money for something I can get from sony for free.
I already pay for internet I should not have to pay again as the same games will be out on PC and they will not have to pay to play them.
Sony should rethink this idea because in its current form it works well.
 
Usually you can find a deal and get Xbox Live cheaper than $60, I think I usually paid about 40-45 for it per year, which makes this a tad expensive. But maybe they'll have deals too. I was let down to see PS4 added this as well, I liked the online capabilities being free on the PS. However, I do think they're being a bit better about theirs, like you can use Netflix and Hulu without having to be a subscriber. That is something Microsoft really needs to fix. 
 
True, the free online multiplayer was what made playstation competitive microsoft.....but now lets just say I wouldnt be surprised if xbox's ceo is locked up somewhere & is replaced by a sony splinter cell if you know what I mean
 
I'd rather pay for PlayStation+ than Xbox Live Gold at this point. There are far more perks with PS+, and it costs less overall anyway. I don't play any games for PS3 online, and I probably wouldn't play any PS4 games online either, so I'm not really upset.
 
I don't see a major problem paying $5 a month for PSN+. I don't have a lot of money, but to me, that $5 is a worthwhile investment. It's the same way I justify budgeting for my Netflix and Hulu Plus subscriptions. Instead of spening $60+ a month on TV, I spend less than $20 (the cost of the Internet doesn't count, there's no way I wouldn't have that AND cable). The cost of PSN+ doesn't have quite the same direct correlation to something more expensive, but I see it as an option of something I can do that costs about 15 cents a day so I won't need to spend money other places to get my entertainment.

Now, if I have to pay for a PSN+ subscription AND pay a subscription fee for specific games, I'll get upset. But unless every multiplayer game does that (which I seriously doubt) I wouldn't cancel PSN+; I just wouldn't play the games with a subscription fee.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top