Hardware Anyone else annoyed that we need to pay for online multiplayer?

[grossaffe]

Just curious, how many games do you buy yearly?

I keep a pretty tight gaming budget. For my more recent previous consoles, I own 31 Wii games and 36 Gamecube games. A number of those were gifts, and amongst the games I did buy for myself, a lot of them were purchased used or after the price had dropped. I count 8 games on the Wii that I bought when it first came out, but it also took me over a year to get my hands on one, so during the Wii's life that puts me under two new games a year. When there aren't any games I want to buy at launch but I am in need of games, I delve into older games to pick up on a budget.

 

[Lestworth]

I myself do not have a PS+ membership ... yet ... I've seen the benefits of it, and its been foolish of me to look the other way. Granted i dont have all the time on my hands to play all the free games that have come out for ps+ members, but i have missed out on a lot that i wouldnt of mind playing as well.

Ps+ $5 a month is nothing compared to what you get back out of it. If you buy 1 game new, thats 1 yr and 10+ games you get for free. Theirs just no comparison, and odds are that 1 game will be free in PS+ in the next 8 months or be seriously discounted within 4 month.

I'm quitting a game, and putting that membership price to a PS+ subscription here soon.

 

[calmwaters]

Well, I'm not very fond of the $5/month fee for online multiplayer either, but I have been a PlayStation Plus member for quite some time and don't see myself without it. I could certainly understand people who don't have PS+ already, but $5 a month really ain't all that bad..

Yes, $5 a month isn't bad, considering the price of an Xbox Live membership. But, if you've kept something free for years, then I would keep it that way. It's like Nintendo charging Wii U owners a fee for accessing the Nintendo Network; I don't see it happening. Plus, charging a fee for the Playstation Network might possibly make people drift to Nintendo since they don't charge a fee for their network.

 

[Psionic Roshambo]

Anyone who really does not like monthly fee's will probably just buy a Wii-U, after that PSN+ seems to offer the better deal if your going to pay. I can't speak from experience here but from what I understand Microsoft's online right now seems like an advertising service (if the complaints of some of my friends are to be believed lol)

Honestly if I was to be paying for network access, Sony has made the deal so good that even I have considered it at times. Maybe some Xbox person can enlighten me but does Microsoft offer free games and stuff with XBox Live?

From my perspective I would compare PSN+ to Netflix, yeah it sucks you don't get to keep stuff when you don't pay... but the price isn't half bad. The one question I have about PSN+ is this. Say I was to sign up for PSN+ right now, do I get access to the past months of free games like signing up for Netflix or do I just get what ever that months free game is and any ones going forward? If it is the later... That makes it a little less nice, still nice but as a greedy person more is always better lol

 

[Devin]

Anyone who really does not like monthly fee's will probably just buy a Wii-U, after that PSN+ seems to offer the better deal if your going to pay. I can't speak from experience here but from what I understand Microsoft's online right now seems like an advertising service (if the complaints of some of my friends are to be believed lol)

Honestly if I was to be paying for network access, Sony has made the deal so good that even I have considered it at times. Maybe some Xbox person can enlighten me but does Microsoft offer free games and stuff with XBox Live?

From my perspective I would compare PSN+ to Netflix, yeah it sucks you don't get to keep stuff when you don't pay... but the price isn't half bad. The one question I have about PSN+ is this. Say I was to sign up for PSN+ right now, do I get access to the past months of free games like signing up for Netflix or do I just get what ever that months free game is and any ones going forward? If it is the later... That makes it a little less nice, still nice but as a greedy person more is always better lol

For Xbox Live Gold you didn't get access to anything special. Without Gold there's no Netflix access, Hulu, online multiplayer, etc. They announced at E3 a Xbox Live+ deal where gold members get free games each month.

As for the PSN+ it's the latter. You get the month's games you subscribed on, onward.

 

[Ethevion]

I keep a pretty tight gaming budget. For my more recent previous consoles, I own 31 Wii games and 36 Gamecube games. A number of those were gifts, and amongst the games I did buy for myself, a lot of them were purchased used or after the price had dropped. I count 8 games on the Wii that I bought when it first came out, but it also took me over a year to get my hands on one, so during the Wii's life that puts me under two new games a year. When there aren't any games I want to buy at launch but I am in need of games, I delve into older games to pick up on a budget.

In that case, I respect why you're against this.

Yes, $5 a month isn't bad, considering the price of an Xbox Live membership. But, if you've kept something free for years, then I would keep it that way. It's like Nintendo charging Wii U owners a fee for accessing the Nintendo Network; I don't see it happening. Plus, charging a fee for the Playstation Network might possibly make people drift to Nintendo since they don't charge a fee for their network.

XBox Live on the 360 was $60/year ($5/month), but my bro gets it on sale on those sites that sell codes for around $40 ($3.33/month). So I don't get what you're trying to compare. Besides, I doubt many XBox 360 players moved to Nintendo because they had to pay for online play.

 

[grossaffe]

In that case, I respect why you're against this.

 

[gokujr1000]

Paying only means you're going to get a higher quality service in return.

 

[calmwaters]

In that case, I respect why you're against this.


XBox Live on the 360 was $60/year ($5/month), but my bro gets it on sale on those sites that sell codes for around $40 ($3.33/month). So I don't get what you're trying to compare. Besides, I doubt many XBox 360 players moved to Nintendo because they had to pay for online play.

I think there's a difference between the players that have Xbox Live accounts and the ones on the PSN. I think the main reason people have PSN accounts is so they can download games. Why charge a fee when they're already making money from their network? Xbox Live has an online store, but I don't think people download games from there; at least not the majority of them. So, Microsoft has to charge them a monthly fee so that they don't lose money on it.

So, if Playstation started charging a fee for their network, then most of those people would move to Nintendo so they could continue to download games for free... I guess Xbox Live owners don't really care about game downloads. I think all of this sounds really weird.

 

[Mantis41]

Until recently the Playstation network was one of the reasons to get an xbox. I am happy to pay a few pound a month to ensure the service is faultless.

 

[Ethevion]

I think there's a difference between the players that have Xbox Live accounts and the ones on the PSN. I think the main reason people have PSN accounts is so they can download games. Why charge a fee when they're already making money from their network? Xbox Live has an online store, but I don't think people download games from there; at least not the majority of them. So, Microsoft has to charge them a monthly fee so that they don't lose money on it.

So, if Playstation started charging a fee for their network, then most of those people would move to Nintendo so they could continue to download games for free... I guess Xbox Live owners don't really care about game downloads. I think all of this sounds really weird.

I disagree, I think most gamers are smart enough to realize that they're paying for quality. I'm sure we can agree that most gamers will play online and as you can see with the record setting preorders of the PS4 and even the XBone, not many are moving to Nintendo.

 

[Mantis41]

One thing to add is I wish they would make it one PSN+ access required per household. It starts to get a bit more expensive if you have several people wanting online accounts.

 

[calmwaters]

I disagree, I think most gamers are smart enough to realize that they're paying for quality. I'm sure we can agree that most gamers will play online and as you can see with the record setting preorders of the PS4 and even the XBone, not many are moving to Nintendo.

True; I like playing games online. But that's still not a good reason for charging people. Maybe Sony is wanting to mimic Microsoft's practices so they can make money off their network as well. They think, "Microsoft charges people for using their network and those people are okay with it; maybe if we charge people for using our network, then they'll be okay with it as well." People won't flock to the Nintendo even if they do charge a fee, but the Playstation people have put up more of a fuss about paying to play online than the Microsoft people. I don't want to pay an extra five dollars a month to access the downloadable games when I used to get them for free. It's like Facebook charging people five dollars for accessing their games.

 

[calmwaters]

One thing to add is I wish they would make it one PSN+ access required per household. It starts to get a bit more expensive if you have several people wanting online accounts.

One account, four users. The person who bought the account can pay an extra dollar for each new user he wants to add. Sounds better than what it is right now.

 

[Ethevion]

True; I like playing games online. But that's still not a good reason for charging people. Maybe Sony is wanting to mimic Microsoft's practices so they can make money off their network as well. They think, "Microsoft charges people for using their network and those people are okay with it; maybe if we charge people for using our network, then they'll be okay with it as well." People won't flock to the Nintendo even if they do charge a fee, but the Playstation people have put up more of a fuss about paying to play online than the Microsoft people. I don't want to pay an extra five dollars a month to access the downloadable games when I used to get them for free. It's like Facebook charging people five dollars for accessing their games.

Better servers is a good enough reason for me to pay, not for Facebook though lol. Besides, in the end it always comes down to money.

 

[Qtis]

I don't want to pay an extra five dollars a month to access the downloadable games when I used to get them for free. It's like Facebook charging people five dollars for accessing their games.

I highly doubt you have to pay to be able to download games you buy on PSN on the PS4. In the E3 presentation they said multiplayer is for PS+. All other content (Netflix, Youtube, etc) were said to be just like the PS3. Free.

 

[calmwaters]

I highly doubt you have to pay to be able to download games you buy on PSN on the PS4. In the E3 presentation they said multiplayer is for PS+. All other content (Netflix, Youtube, etc) were said to be just like the PS3. Free.

So, you buy the game and then buy the multiplayer in addition to it? Is it like buying Mario Kart Wii and then buying the Mario Kart Channel to play with people online? Sounds really stupid. Or like downloading Pokemon from the Wii Shop Channel and then buying the channel that lets you trade with your friends? (They don't have Pokemon on the WSC...)

 

[Mantis41]

One account, four users. The person who bought the account can pay an extra dollar for each new user he wants to add. Sounds better than what it is right now.

Sounds good to me. Where do I sign.

 

[Qtis]

So, you buy the game and then buy the multiplayer in addition to it? Is it like buying Mario Kart Wii and then buying the Mario Kart Channel to play with people online? Sounds really stupid. Or like downloading Pokemon from the Wii Shop Channel and then buying the channel that lets you trade with your friends? (They don't have Pokemon on the WSC...)

You must have heard of something called single player games? Or perhaps local multiplayer? Also while I can congratulate on your effort in comparing PSN or XBL to Nintendo's online services, they're miles apart. As many have mentioned before, PSN lacked quite a bit compared to XBL, but they've caught up and even surpassed XBL in many sections. Nintendo are in the same situation as Sony was in the beginning with PSN.

As for the examples, yes that could sound stupid. Still, people pay for many things including World of Warcraft, Netflix, Spotify and other entertainment services. Some people even pay for a service and then buy or rent stuff inside the service. You may not be the target of the service, but that's why we have alternatives in a (sort of) working free economy. The cliché would be to say "Don't buy it, so that they may change their policies", but that's kinda meh as it is far too broad.

 

[beta4attack]

Well, I don't own a PS3 and I'm not planning on picking up a PS4 any soon, but getting a whole game library for the price of one? Who can complain about that? You can live your whole life on that without buying any extra games. O_O And not only that, but you get a lot of nice stuff with it. I, for one (if I had a PS3 or a PS4), would subscribe even if online didn't require it.