You'd be a FOOL not to subscribe to Playstation Plus...now.

#131DemonDog666Posted 11/24/2012 2:48:13 PM
L0L_FAQ posted...
Sure, but that's assuming those games are still new, priced at $50 (most Vita games are priced at $40) and you couldn't buy it used etc. All the games that PS+ is offering are already old and you can't play them past your subscription; the whole point is to get you roped into a service that costs Sony almost nothing. I can already buy Gravity Rush for about $30 and sell it for about $20-25.


First of all learn to read troll I said 10 more not the same. Second if you end up selling it that defeats the whole purpose of owning it rather then just playing it on psn+ until you are down with it. Third Gamestop can sell it for 5 or 10 off current new price, not you, so unless you own gamestop you can't sell it for that much. Forth even if every game you get on psn+ could be bought and then sold with only 5 dollar cost to you, that's only 10 games until it breaks even over the year, it's only been one month and already half way there.

So in the end you really have no point and are just trolling
#132RD_21Posted 11/24/2012 4:40:36 PM
L0L_FAQ posted...
From: RD_21 | #119
How am I brainwashed Compass? If pay for PS+ for the discount and for the cloud save so in MY case the games are free


I paid $22000 because I like Honda's magazines and newsletter. My Honda Civic was ABSOLUTELY FREE!


Keep being of bad faith all you want.
#133RD_21Posted 11/24/2012 4:56:19 PM
xfactor posted...
RD_21 posted...
Compass posted...
It's amazing how effectively marketing has brainwashed some of you to the point you literally don't know what the word "free" actually means.


How am I brainwashed Compass? If pay for PS+ for the discount and for the cloud save so in MY case the games are free, but let's pretend that technically they are not free since I'm paying a subscription and all that, who cares? Do you say that you don't get to watch movies for free when you subscribe to Netflix?

So yeah technically speaking they are not free, who freaking cares? I pay 50$ a year and I'm getting 500$ in games. We can then enter in a debate stating that there's some games in that list I would not have bought if I had to buy them so I can scratch them but still.

Technically speaking the subscription is not free, but the games are free with the subscription.


The game rental cost is part of the subscription fee that you paid.

Its like paying money for a night in the hotel room and then claim everything in the hotel room is free...which doesn't make sense.

"Hey the money i paid for a night in the room cost less than the bed which i will be using for the night! The bed is free!"


But the subscription is not just the "free" games, there's more to it. The games are still free if you have a subscription and if you think about it most people had PS+ for he PS3 and never subscribe for the Vita so the Vita PS+ is a bonus. Of course EVERYBODY knows the game are not free if you don't have a subscription so it's not really free, but once you have a subscription they are and even if you want to point that I'm only getting 500$ of games for 50$ and hat it's not free since I paid 50$ well go ahead.

People say that he games are free with a subscription, because it's more convenient to say than start entering dumb semantics saying that you are paying 50$ and that 50% of the value are the games, because there's also discounts, cloud saving and automatic updates. I don't see how it's so offensive for you guys to say that the game are free with a subscription, it's just the general way of calling it.

And if you really don't want to say that the games are free with a subscription, which they are, we could say that after the first 50$ of discounts and "free" games, then the others are free.
#134x_lone_x_wolf_xPosted 11/24/2012 5:00:31 PM
PS+ is an amazing deal. Anyone who says otherwise is either a collector or an idiot.
---
"He's dead! I love him.... Oh he's breathing.... Loser!"
#135L0L_FAQPosted 11/24/2012 5:08:55 PM
From: DemonDog666 | #131
First of all learn to read troll I said 10 more not the same.


That sentence itself makes no sense whatsoever. 10 more what? I assumed you were remotely capable of intelligent thought and meant "10 times more".

Second if you end up selling it that defeats the whole purpose of owning it rather then just playing it on psn+ until you are down with it.


I can play it play it for however long I like with only a cost differential of about 5 to 10 bucks. If I want to play it for more than 2 months, I'm going at a loss with PSN+

Third Gamestop can sell it for 5 or 10 off current new price, not you, so unless you own gamestop you can't sell it for that much.


Let me introduce you to this new technology. It's called "not selling it at gamestop, because gamestop takes a very large portion of the final sale".

http://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/B0050SW1WW/ref=dp_olp_used?ie=UTF8&condition=used

Forth even if every game you get on psn+ could be bought and then sold with only 5 dollar cost to you, that's only 10 games until it breaks even over the year, it's only been one month and already half way there.


I'm going to try to make some sense of this horribly mangled desecration of the English language:

"if every game I could get on PSN_ could be had by me for only a final cost of about $5, I could buy 10 games until I broke even with the costs of PS+ for a year"

Am I getting that correctly?

What if I want a game not on PSN+? What if I don't want particular games on PSN+ and I get a game one month that want to play for 3 months, but that would require me to keep up the membership for 3 months, AKA 15 dollars as opposed to the total $5 differential?

PSN+ is a good deal if

A) You definitely would play all the PSN+ games if they weren't available as part of PSN+ (in my case, I already own all three PSN+ games) so that you're getting a better net value than if you played all those games physically
B) You don't plan on only playing 1 game for an extended period of time, which would be a net loss on a per-game basis
C) All the games on PSN+ are necessarily the ones you haven't already played "which is the case right now)
---
http://i.imgur.com/vpXc3.png http://i.imgur.com/lljy5.jpg
"L0L_FAQ is one of the reasons I even read the forums any more" - CJayC
#136GoonbooPosted 11/24/2012 5:21:32 PM
Bought a full year, paid 50 dollars, I've spent more on skins in leave of legends.

It's called supporting something that you enjoy, the fact that Sony is releasing games for this as well is amazing, on top of discounts already.

It's a guaranteed revenue source for them, but overall they will probably lose more money than they make because o this great deal.

Hell I really wanted to play both gravity rush and uncharted, but i didn't wan to shell out the full 40 for each.

This basically let's me play them both for 20 dollars, and an entire year of other FREE games they release on PS+

Even if every game they release from now on is a game I already own. It's still worth the value.

Amazing how millions of people shove 10 dollars a month into microsofts mouth just to gain access to online services... In 2012 mind you.

And no one complains, comes out to at least 120 dollars a year just for that, nothin else free.
---
PSN: Goonboo86, feel free to add me as a friend!!
Playing: LBPV, Dungeon Hunter, Wipeout, Borderlands 2, LoL, D3
#137L0L_FAQPosted 11/24/2012 5:28:03 PM
From: Goonboo | #136
It's a guaranteed revenue source for them, but overall they will probably lose more money than they make because o this great deal.


No, lol. It costs them nothing on top of their existing infrastructure to provide you this "deal".

Even if every game they release from now on is a game I already own. It's still worth the value.


How so?

Amazing how millions of people shove 10 dollars a month into microsofts mouth just to gain access to online services... In 2012 mind you.


Xbox Live is scummy. You don't need to contrast the horribleness of PS+ with greater horribleness that is XBL. The only reason to do so is damage control. Yes, Hitler existed, didn't make Ted Bundy any less of a scumbag.
---
http://i.imgur.com/vpXc3.png http://i.imgur.com/lljy5.jpg
"L0L_FAQ is one of the reasons I even read the forums any more" - CJayC
#138GoonbooPosted 11/24/2012 5:36:38 PM
L0L_FAQ posted...
From: Goonboo | #136
It's a guaranteed revenue source for them, but overall they will probably lose more money than they make because o this great deal.


No, lol. It costs them nothing on top of their existing infrastructure to provide you this "deal".

Even if every game they release from now on is a game I already own. It's still worth the value.


How so?

Amazing how millions of people shove 10 dollars a month into microsofts mouth just to gain access to online services... In 2012 mind you.


Xbox Live is scummy. You don't need to contrast the horribleness of PS+ with greater horribleness that is XBL. The only reason to do so is damage control. Yes, Hitler existed, didn't make Ted Bundy any less of a scumbag.


Be wary of this one, the troll is strong within him.

Anyways. Keep it up, drive to GameStop. Sell on amazon or kijiji or whatever you do.

I clicked one button and got access to games for an entire year, I'm sorry 50 dollars is such a huge investment for you, may I suggest cutting down on Twinkie hoarding, as obviously you have greater priorities to spend your money on.
---
PSN: Goonboo86, feel free to add me as a friend!!
Playing: LBPV, Dungeon Hunter, Wipeout, Borderlands 2, LoL, D3
#139TranslatorTomPosted 11/24/2012 6:05:09 PM
Playstation Plus sucks in Japan. There's only one Vita game on there. Sumioni. One of the worst Vita games to be released.
---
-Tom
#140CompassPosted 11/24/2012 6:29:20 PM
Goonboo posted...
Bought a full year, paid 50 dollars, I've spent more on skins in leave of legends.

lol @ you being absolutely terrible with your money somehow proof PSN+ is a good value.