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

#151MagoichiPosted 11/24/2012 9:19:43 PM
hypermoe posted...
DemonDog666 posted...
hypermoe posted...
And out of that list of 170 items i can i own (either on the ps3 or any other console/pc) maybe 150-160 of them with the rest being iffy, or uninterested. So again tell me how will it be worth it on my end when majority of the time im going to be getting games i already own?

I'm not saying PS+ is bad. i just wish there was a way for me to actually enjoy it instead of guessing and hoping hey maybe next week/month will be better, and more often than not it isnt. Even with that i wish they did something where if a game is giving out for free they should have it at a discounted price for us to buy and keep, as one of the perks for PS+ is discounts they barely do that for decent items.

Again not saying its bad but for someone like me im not going to be getting my money worth out it, as i did last year. If they fix it to a way where its like hey it seems you have this item here's an item you dont have that maybe you would like, or discount on a vast majority of different genres maybe ill consider it again, but for the time being for me its not worth it.


If you buy that many games maybe you should be more focused on the discounts and have some self restraint and not buy games for full price the second they release.


Who says i bought my games full price? i either way on them to go on sale, buy them used/online, or rent/borrow them. i can say that i have barely bought any new games this year there just isnt that much that sparks interest in me, or have rented them and found out i didnt enjoy it.

If anything i save money more doing what i do now instead of using PS+ since i can actually choose what games i want to rent/buy, or however you people want to say it. I dont see why you need to call me a fool for not using a service i have tried in the past and not being happy with, and decided to go another route.


It's not your fault...people from both sides are belligerent and condescending with their perspectives, so they end up treating almost all dissenters the same after a while. It's bad for both sides, really. I hope this nonsense ends soon, but of course it won't.
#152DemonDog666Posted 11/24/2012 9:28:58 PM
hypermoe posted...
Who says i bought my games full price? i either way on them to go on sale, buy them used/online, or rent/borrow them. i can say that i have barely bought any new games this year there just isnt that much that sparks interest in me, or have rented them and found out i didnt enjoy it.

If anything i save money more doing what i do now instead of using PS+ since i can actually choose what games i want to rent/buy, or however you people want to say it. I dont see why you need to call me a fool for not using a service i have tried in the past and not being happy with, and decided to go another route.


More then 10 of those games were fairly new when they were released on psn+... so yeah... you did.

And seeing how much you buy I don't see why you don't jump on psn+ for the discounts I can see why you have little interest in the free games if you already own most of them though.
#153Gigahart_gaylorPosted 11/24/2012 9:45:16 PM
Yes, you are technically renting the free games. But it's not going to take you a whole year to beat a game.
---
Breaking Bad, great show or greatest show?
Anybody who says Dark Souls gameplay sucks is factually incorrect.
#154kcypher2000Posted 11/24/2012 10:02:39 PM
Gigahart_gaylor posted...
Yes, you are technically renting the free games. But it's not going to take you a whole year to beat a game.


The whole point of this whole "its not free" business is that people are arguing semantics. Its not free, but it might still be a good deal. Yes if you beat the game and never plan to play it again and you enjoy the games that are "leased" then its great. If you don't like the games they have available or you want to own the games and might one day cancel the service then it might be better to just shell out the money and buy the game.

Personally I think its a good deal for most new vita owners. However I think this is bad business for Sony. I am all for them adding value to ps+ but i think its going to hurt them in the long run if some ps+ owners decide to not purchase new released titles assuming they will one day be added to ps+.
#155RD_21Posted 11/26/2012 7:20:31 AM
xfactor posted...
RD_21 posted...
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.


Just because renting the game within the subscription isnt the only benefit, doesn't change the point that they are not free too. It only shows that the deal is good to you...that's all. Calling them free with a subscription is just misleading.


I still don't see how calling them free with a subscription is misleading. You have a subscription, guess what they are free to play. You don't have a subscription, you have to pay to play them.

Again saying they are 100% free may be wrong, but saying that they are free with a subscription is 100% correct.
#156Lazy JonesPosted 11/26/2012 7:41:14 AM
You people make me laugh. Is it not ok to say it works for some people and not for others? If you're playing it a lot it make perfect sense. If you only play a few games, then it better not to have PS+. Anyway, time for a group hug.
---
This is gonna sound weird, but for a second, I think you took on the shape of a unicorn
PSN:drpokerface