I think Bob's been on the gear again.

K thanks. Was just curious as I quite fancied trying that Tokyo Jungle nonsense for a laugh. Ah well.

Not any more

Why the fuck not

Paul the sparky wrote:

Bob wrote:

retroking1981 wrote:

MattyJ wrote:

Bob wrote:

I think £10 is reasonable now they're putting retails games on PS4 in the monthly selection. Has the price ever gone up on it since inception?

? Plus has always had retail games? Since its PS3 inception. The point on PS4 is to allow you to play online, isn't it? And the games were a bonus. So now it's more expensive than Xbox Live.

This is whats really pissed me off about PS+

They've softly introduced payed online disguised with free games.

I just don't get enough out of the games they offer and subsequently lose out on playing online, its turned into a big negative for me.

Now even Nintendo are at it, soon at least. I play MK8 online about once a fortnight, next year I'll have to pay for that and probably won't which is a shame.

You can say I'm being tight but we've gone from last Gen where two of the three offered free online to all three charging. At one point I thought MS might drop the Live charge to go in-line with Sony and Nintendo's free model, how wrong I was.

Lol
Tl:dr

But Xbox have been bumming you for years with paid for online disguised as paid for online

Come again?

Yeah, come again?

Bob wrote:

Why would the PS4 be magically backwards compatible with ps+ games?

I just wondered if some maybe were as they show up on the PS4 dash.

It was fine when Xbox 360 had decent online infrastructure that you paid for, when PS and Nintendo had rubbish online but which you didn't have to pay for.

But now all 3 are rubbish and paid for. So... that's ok?

djchump wrote:

retroking1981 wrote:

Paul the sparky wrote:

Bob wrote:

retroking1981 wrote:

... whats really pissed me off about PS+
They've softly introduced payed online disguised with free games.
...

Lol
Tl:dr

But Xbox have been bumming you for years with paid for online disguised as paid for online

Come again?

Yeah, come again?

Not really all that hard to parse tbh, just thumbing the nose at Xbox starting the trend of having to pay for online.

I don't get two things there though, where the disguise comes in and what's wrong with paying for a good service?

hylian_elf wrote:

It was fine when Xbox 360 had decent online infrastructure that you paid for, when PS and Nintendo had rubbish online but which you didn't have to pay for.

But now all 3 are rubbish and paid for. So... that's ok?

Exactly, it's not, and imo PS+ was a big part of getting to this point.

Yeah they've ported a load of those indie ones from last gen.

djchump wrote:

retroking1981 wrote:

Paul the sparky wrote:

Bob wrote:

retroking1981 wrote:

... whats really pissed me off about PS+ They've softly introduced payed online disguised with free games. ...

Lol Tl:dr But Xbox have been bumming you for years with paid for online disguised as paid for online

Come again?

Yeah, come again?

Not really all that hard to parse tbh, just thumbing the nose at Xbox starting the trend of having to pay for online.

Sometimes I feel I'm wasted around these parts...

Keep the faith chump

I'm not suggesting that. But if that's what you've taken from it well done ..go to the top of the cla... no hang on. Don't be an eejit

I still don't get it. When Xbox Live was introduced it was as an online service only, no free games, and people were happy to pay it.

What were they disguising there?

PS+ started as a monthly subscription for a selection of games with odds and sods like cloud saves, but the online play was still free. Now it's not, and now it's getting a price hike.

So Retro's point is valid, as the PS+ model has changed and become worse value, whereas the Xbox Live service has added free games to the existing service and stayed the same price, so it is better value?

Moot_Geeza wrote:

I've got two nephews mooching from online subs on a 360 and PS3 respectively, so their Christmas presents - a code in a card - double up as a gifting myself around 40 games on the Bone and PS4.  They might send out the odd Minecraft invitation, but partridgeshrug.

This is a good example of the + service working and I don't have a problem with that. Paying for the monthly games is fine, and there are plenty of people out there who benefit from it. 

Individuals can weigh up if that sevice is worthwhile for them, its all good.

My problem is when online play quietly became a part of that service. I had + for a few years, loved it at first, financially benefiting from it playing are more than the £40 charge. That slowly changed though and got to a point where I wasn't playing anything so decided to let it lapse.

By this point the online was a part of the service so the odd MP on CoD or PES was lost to me.

Now I'm at a point where I have to pay just for those odd games and a + service I get nothing from. I'm always looking at the monthly games hoping its starts stringing together a service worthwhile for me. Nothing yet, I'm still on the fence and Sony have pushed me further away with this £10 increase.

PS+ is great for those that want it, paid online isn't.

As an individual I'm in a worse situation than I was before + existed.

So , has anyone tried the Lawbreakers beta that's available ? I think it looks great. Can't try it myself as I've just moved and got no internet till Tuesday