PS4 - Membership fees?

[Sikslik7]

PS4 - Membership Fees?

 

From CheatCodeCentral: http://dispatches.cheatcc.com/dispatches/343?utm_source=zergnet.com&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=zergnet_66319

 

Speculation has risen regarding a comment made by Sony's President and CEO of Sony Computer Entertainment of America (SCEA), Jack Tretton, during Sony's E3 conference. While many people completely missed this comment, a few did over at Cheatcc. Instead, most people focused on Sony's main presentation strategy, how Sony isn't being like Microsoft in their next generation console. The comment in question regards the PlayStation Plus program with the PS4. 

 

 

 

When speaking of PlayStation Plus subscriptions, Tretton said that PS+ would allow players to, "immerse themselves (subscribers) in the incredible PS4 games with online multiplayer." 

 

 

And that means? It means in order to play online multiplayer on the PS4, you need to be a PS+ subscriber. The current subscription for one year of PS+ is $50, and works as a discount and special content center for PSN, similar to the free Xbox live Rewards program. The only difference on current consoles: PS3 online free, but pay $50 for benefits, or Xbox 360, pay $60 for online, but free benefits.

 

If Sony does shift the PS4 to a mandated cost for online, by merging PSN and PS+, the playing field between the new consoles will be greatly leveled. One of the biggest advantages for Sony has been free online, but if that changes with the PS4,it could spell disaster for sales and player loyalty. More clarifying information is needed before this can be confirmed.

 

 

No comment has been made by Sony on this speculation, but little attention has been on the PS4, and is instead focused on the unclear statements, rumors, abilities, and limitations regarding the Xbox One.

 

 

[TornadoFlame]

i heard its 5 bucks a month..... not much lol.

[a live dinosaur]

They announced at their E3 show that there will be fees. Finally something to use to make all of these annoying Sony fanboys shut up.

[Drizzy_Dan]

HA! Take that PS3 owners that use free live as an excuse!

[TornadoFlame]

They announced at their E3 show that there will be fees. Finally something to use to make all of these annoying Sony fanboys shut up.

this probably would have been a much bigger issue had micr0soft not dig there own grave at E3

[a live dinosaur]

this probably would have been a much bigger issue had micr0soft not dig there own grave at E3

 

Not going to get into an argument, but watch, Microsoft will succeed. Consumers sometimes don't know what they want.

[Is not JL]

Not going to get into an argument, but watch, Microsoft will succeed. Consumers sometimes don't know what they want.

I want: Xbox One

What microsoft won't give my country: Xbox One

[Sikslik7]

i heard its 5 bucks a month..... not much lol.

 

$5 a month is the same as an Xbox live membership if you buy a year as normal price, but sales can lower Live membership to $3 a month or less.

[TornadoFlame]

Not going to get into an argument, but watch, Microsoft will succeed. Consumers sometimes don't know what they want.

i know when in 10-20 years when ps5 or ps6 is out Ill still have my ps4  to play unlike my xbox one which will be a brick and all my games will be lost because of these game breaking issues. But i'm not looking at the xbox one ps4 in a sense of Which will be better i'm thinking about which one will work better in the future and if people seriously plan to go with microsoft then just wait till movies and music companies find out this and they start to make a 24 hour check in for movies and music and not being able trade or give them to your friends.

 

as a consumers, i was excited for the xbox But that was short lived. i only enjoy the Xbox Live and switching from single player to multiplayer. But. I wont support a system that wont cater to the women and men who are dieing and fighting for are country Because they desire this time off to have fun offshift in a hostile land. DRM is sad i hate gamestop  what about all those small market business i guess there gone and we have yet more people without jobs.  and the issue that really pushed me from xbox one was when the ceo of microsoft came out and said well if you don't have internet theres a system for you and its the xbox 360? pure ignorance and horrible marketing No its not called a xbox 360 its called a playstation 4.

 

p.s i don't really wanna argue about how bad the xbox one is i'd like opionons on how you could support such a system that only cares about themselves Hell microsoft is not going to support indie gamers unless they have a publisher...... :/  i will admit the new remedy game and titanfall are cool but more then likely both will be out for pc.

 

anyways ill be buying a ps4. unless they fix all these game breaking issues because i really enjoy the xbox.

Edited June 17, 2013 by TornadoFlame

[BaconShelf]

I am buying XBONE for Halo. 'Nuff said.

 

 

But everyone knows....

 

PC MASTER RACE FTW!

[fzdw11]

Tornado has hit the nail on the head here, IMO, and I don't agree with him often.  The Xbox One just doesn't seem right, and I will happily take the $60 I'm paying MS right now for XBox Live and give that to Sony for PS+.  It's just the logical step.  There are very few things that I feel MS has gotten right since they've announced the One.  Having one Gold membership per box, and allowing up to 10 family members on said box to use its features?  That is great.  But that is about it.  

 

Titanfall?  Coming to the 360 and PC.  *shrug*  The only real game that is going to make me sad about not getting a One is Halo 5.  And unless 343 does something amazing with it, I don't plan on getting a One for just one game.

[Is not JL]

I think the bottom line is, nobody cares whether there is a fee; we either take it or we don't. PS fans can stop laughing about free internet but now they get to laugh about the 100$ they don't need to pay.

[RedStarRocket91]

Consider it this way. You need a $60 LIVE membership for the Xbox 360 and Xbox One in order to access online multiplayer (note that this does NOT automatically qualify you where a publisher demands an online pass), join parties, access both free and paid apps like BBC iPlayer, YouTube, Netflix and LoveFilm, and download paid DLC items from the marketplace.

 

The $60 you'll be giving to Sony allows access to online multiplayer and also means you'll get free games which you can keep for as long as you maintain your PS+ membership. Any apps, whether free or paid, also don't require purchase of PS+ to use. and of course, you can ignore it altogether if you have a PS3, and keep playing online as much as you wish.

 

 

They announced at their E3 show that there will be fees. Finally something to use to make all of these annoying Sony fanboys shut up.

 

So basically, 'Sony fanboys' should shut up because they're paying the same price for a better service? I'm sorry, but I don't buy into that. Xbox LIVE was always superior because, while it was subscription-based, you got a lot more out of it than you did via Sony's system: servers tended to be a little less laggy, an advantage that existed far too long into the PS3's life-cycle, chatting with friends was easier and more convenient, the user interface controls were better and of course games themselves tended to be a bit cheaper (at least at first) because Sony needed some way of paying for their servers without a membership fee.

 

PS+ however is a better service than XBL, even though it's going to be mandatory for online gaming, because you get more out of it. And I'm sorry, but Microsoft's garbage about giving people free games in the future is a sad and transparent PR stunt. Halo 3 came out SIX YEARS AGO, and Assassin's Creed II has had something like four games come out since its own release. This is not some way of appreciating players, it's a poor attempt to try and con them into thinking that's what they're doing because these titles have run their course and there's no more profit to be made out of them. And the chances are that if you're a Halo fan, you already own Halo 3, just as Assassin's Creed fans probably already own the second entry. PS+ subscribers get titles which are sometimes only a few months old: when Deus Ex came out, I'm pretty sure it was made freely available to PS+ members after only two months or something.

 

As for the 'exclusive' deals on Xbox... look for yourself. You're still paying dozens of pounds or dollars or euros because the big titles tend to only get small discounts, and Games On Demand does not account for value depreciation. X-Com: Enemy Unknown is a good example, though I freely admit this could be exclusive to Britain as I don't know what pricing is like elsewhere. I quite decided I wanted to pay it, and a few weeks back I saw a deal offering 10% off via GoD. Since it was then about a year old, I assumed I'd probably end up paying about £20 for it, as games normally retail for £40 on launch day. However, the GoD version was £60 BEFORE DISCOUNT. They're taking our membership fees to give us 'exclusive deals' which make things more expensive then they were on release day, and while anecdotal I've never heard of any similar stupidity over on PSN.

 

So is making PS+ mandatory a good thing? Of course not. But at least you're getting what you pay for, and at the same price as XBL. It's time for Microsoft to realise that in a capitalist market, you've got to compete to stay relevant, instead of demanding more money to access content that's already been paid for elsewhere as with Netflix (and until a few weeks ago, online passes on EA games), and handing out old, worn-out titles which most fans probably already own as a way of pretending that you're offering the same level of service as a competing platform which is handing out new, A-list titles.

[TornadoFlame]

i had no idea assassin creed 2 was free time to download and try to get into it..

[a live dinosaur]

Consider it this way. You need a $60 LIVE membership for the Xbox 360 and Xbox One in order to access online multiplayer (note that this does NOT automatically qualify you where a publisher demands an online pass), join parties, access both free and paid apps like BBC iPlayer, YouTube, Netflix and LoveFilm, and download paid DLC items from the marketplace.

 

The $60 you'll be giving to Sony allows access to online multiplayer and also means you'll get free games which you can keep for as long as you maintain your PS+ membership. Any apps, whether free or paid, also don't require purchase of PS+ to use. and of course, you can ignore it altogether if you have a PS3, and keep playing online as much as you wish.

 

 

 

So basically, 'Sony fanboys' should shut up because they're paying the same price for a better service? I'm sorry, but I don't buy into that. Xbox LIVE was always superior because, while it was subscription-based, you got a lot more out of it than you did via Sony's system: servers tended to be a little less laggy, an advantage that existed far too long into the PS3's life-cycle, chatting with friends was easier and more convenient, the user interface controls were better and of course games themselves tended to be a bit cheaper (at least at first) because Sony needed some way of paying for their servers without a membership fee.

 

PS+ however is a better service than XBL, even though it's going to be mandatory for online gaming, because you get more out of it. And I'm sorry, but Microsoft's garbage about giving people free games in the future is a sad and transparent PR stunt. Halo 3 came out SIX YEARS AGO, and Assassin's Creed II has had something like four games come out since its own release. This is not some way of appreciating players, it's a poor attempt to try and con them into thinking that's what they're doing because these titles have run their course and there's no more profit to be made out of them. And the chances are that if you're a Halo fan, you already own Halo 3, just as Assassin's Creed fans probably already own the second entry. PS+ subscribers get titles which are sometimes only a few months old: when Deus Ex came out, I'm pretty sure it was made freely available to PS+ members after only two months or something.

 

As for the 'exclusive' deals on Xbox... look for yourself. You're still paying dozens of pounds or dollars or euros because the big titles tend to only get small discounts, and Games On Demand does not account for value depreciation. X-Com: Enemy Unknown is a good example, though I freely admit this could be exclusive to Britain as I don't know what pricing is like elsewhere. I quite decided I wanted to pay it, and a few weeks back I saw a deal offering 10% off via GoD. Since it was then about a year old, I assumed I'd probably end up paying about £20 for it, as games normally retail for £40 on launch day. However, the GoD version was £60 BEFORE DISCOUNT. They're taking our membership fees to give us 'exclusive deals' which make things more expensive then they were on release day, and while anecdotal I've never heard of any similar stupidity over on PSN.

 

So is making PS+ mandatory a good thing? Of course not. But at least you're getting what you pay for, and at the same price as XBL. It's time for Microsoft to realise that in a capitalist market, you've got to compete to stay relevant, instead of demanding more money to access content that's already been paid for elsewhere as with Netflix (and until a few weeks ago, online passes on EA games), and handing out old, worn-out titles which most fans probably already own as a way of pretending that you're offering the same level of service as a competing platform which is handing out new, A-list titles.

 

Not at all. I agree, Sony IS doing what the people want, but sometimes a company needs to take risks. Microsoft is doing just that. I didn't say Sony fanboys need to shut up because of that, I'm saying they need to shut up because they are handling this like immature little kids. If they grow up and argue like adults, I will accept their beating, but as of now, I am glad people who act like that are leaving Xbox. 

 

Also, if you cancel your PSN+, I hear you lose the free games you got.

 

I think the bottom line is, nobody cares whether there is a fee; we either take it or we don't. PS fans can stop laughing about free internet but now they get to laugh about the 100$ they don't need to pay.

 

Despite all of the DRM, I think the extra $100 will really pay itself off with the One.

[RedStarRocket91]

Not at all. I agree, Sony IS doing what the people want, but sometimes a company needs to take risks. Microsoft is doing just that. I didn't say Sony fanboys need to shut up because of that, I'm saying they need to shut up because they are handling this like immature little kids. If they grow up and argue like adults, I will accept their beating, but as of now, I am glad people who act like that are leaving Xbox. 

 

Also, if you cancel your PSN+, I hear you lose the free games you got.

 

Yeah, once you get rid of PS+ you do lose access to any free games you've had through it - though in fairness, you're only losing something which you weren't really paying for anyway. I think the same thing is set to happen with the free games for XBL Gold members though, so if you've downloaded Fable III, you'll lose access to it if you get rid of Gold.

 

As for the risk-taking... yeah, I can get behind that, but the thing with risks is that you shouldn't be taking them for their own sake: you need to be taking them because there's a higher chance than not that you're going to profit from it. And a lot of the risks they're taking seem to be done out of a raw desire to control their customers, rather than because there's any genuine benefit to them. Blocking used games, a mandatory internet connection, forcing people to put a spy camera in their homes? These aren't risks taken in the hope that gamers will see them as more convenient: they're about controlling us, pure and simple.

 

As for the Sony fanboys... there an awful lot of very good serious and logical arguments against the Xbox One in addition to those from people who just want to troll, and a great deal of them are actually being made by Xbox owners, and people who were excited about what the Xbox One would be before it was announced. I'm not a particularly big fan of either Sony or Microsoft: I just go to the system which I think is best. And for this coming generation, there's very little that could persuade me to continue giving Microsoft my custom short of a serious rethink of their restrictive policies.

[Frankenzer]

Why doesn't Microsoft support my country?

but hopefully we won't hear anymore sony fanboys making fun of free live

[a live dinosaur]

Yeah, once you get rid of PS+ you do lose access to any free games you've had through it - though in fairness, you're only losing something which you weren't really paying for anyway. I think the same thing is set to happen with the free games for XBL Gold members though, so if you've downloaded Fable III, you'll lose access to it if you get rid of Gold.

 

As for the risk-taking... yeah, I can get behind that, but the thing with risks is that you shouldn't be taking them for their own sake: you need to be taking them because there's a higher chance than not that you're going to profit from it. And a lot of the risks they're taking seem to be done out of a raw desire to control their customers, rather than because there's any genuine benefit to them. Blocking used games, a mandatory internet connection, forcing people to put a spy camera in their homes? These aren't risks taken in the hope that gamers will see them as more convenient: they're about controlling us, pure and simple.

 

As for the Sony fanboys... there an awful lot of very good serious and logical arguments against the Xbox One in addition to those from people who just want to troll, and a great deal of them are actually being made by Xbox owners, and people who were excited about what the Xbox One would be before it was announced. I'm not a particularly big fan of either Sony or Microsoft: I just go to the system which I think is best. And for this coming generation, there's very little that could persuade me to continue giving Microsoft my custom short of a serious rethink of their restrictive policies.

 

At E3, Microsoft said that the free games are yours to keep, whether you cancel your subscription or not, but that is probably because there are only 2 games per month.

 

EDIT: Also, I have not played AC2 yet, so I am actually very glad it will be free. I have played the first game and the third. 

Edited June 19, 2013 by Forum Dinosaur

[Igotperks]

@RedStarRocket91 

I agree. I meen recently we found out that the govt is spying on us all secret like. now trying to find the guy and charge him with treason probably. Morgan Freeman in The Dark Knight? anyone?? Thats what that required camera bs is to me.

as for the PS4 vs XB one. its how you play. ppl need to understand that not everyone buys these systems for gaming. they arnt designed for pure gaming anymore....like they should be. Playstation has been trying to hold onto that dream but, convenience get to us, wanting netflix on our gaming system, apps. blah blah blah...Xbox rules that world i think, but as of late, xbox has just been riddled with crap games. So many of these games just.......subpar quality as a whole. I need improvement form Microsoft before giving them my hard earned $$$.$$. Kinect games that real gamers want to play, not just exercise and kids games. I want a mix game of Grand Theft Auto and State or Decay as a massive multiplayer world game.<----- Game lines ups, im concerened that most of these games will be cross platform, meaning the one that gives more control to the user is going to win the battle. grand theft auto, destiny, BF4, CoD, all cross platform. Meening as a born and bread XBox Halo fan if 343 Industries ***** up halo 5. Im done with Xbox and complete with the notion that they ruined the game for me. by taking away everything it is to play halo, not CoD

just typing now, this aint focused toward anyone.

[The Stig]

@RedStarRocket91 

 

I agree. I meen recently we found out that the govt is spying on us all secret like. now trying to find the guy and charge him with treason probably. Morgan Freeman in The Dark Knight? anyone?? Thats what that required camera bs is to me.

 

Well to me I don't care if the government is watching me. I do not have anything to hide. 

 

I mean they are reading every post made on every site, they study everyone's Google and Bing searches, and they use our GPS's in our cars and phones to track us where ever we go, and tap into our cell phones and even land-lines to listen to our conversations anyways... And not to mention Google Maps cars, and Google Earth satellites watching us from space. Privacy is a myth. Now, I am all for privacy but I don't play video games in my underwear, or naked, and I don't say loud and obnoxious things in my house and I don't have anything illegal, and I keep my house Immaculately clean, and I always keep it in a presentable state, so I've got nothing to be embarrassed about, or ashamed of. And neither should you guys/gals. Unless you are a terrorist talking about how to make and sell drugs, build bombs and discussing plans to assassinate the president... Then you should be worried lol 

[BaconShelf]

@RedStarRocket91 

 

I agree. I meen recently we found out that the govt is spying on us all secret like. now trying to find the guy and charge him with treason probably. Morgan Freeman in The Dark Knight? anyone?? Thats what that required camera bs is to me.

 

 

I'm sorry, but do you really believe ONe government can 'Spy' on over 100 million people? And why? Surely you can put a clot or box over the kinetc and cancel that if you're so paranoid...

 

 

Of cours, Here in Britain, we never really get this kind of BS so I may be mistaken but that really just seems way too over the top.

[TDM]

They should allow players to play online for free, Both PS and XBL, Mainly because we want to be with our friends, Not be like.. "I dont have membership... Welp! Time to go rip my friends off for a two day free trial code!" You see? Its just crazy wack weasels..