"Free games on PS+ aren't free."

#431EffectAndCause(Topic Creator)Posted 12/8/2012 3:56:49 PM
If I hand someone $50 dollars and they hand me two games I want that are valued at $50 dollars right back AND give me even more free games, that's a free service. I didn't lose any money.
---
http://i50.tinypic.com/2hdruqq.jpg
http://i47.tinypic.com/wqr38o.gif
#432shampoowarriorPosted 12/9/2012 1:00:21 AM(edited)
Magoichi posted...
It's semantics, but it is semantics that I think ought to be known by a reasonable person.

I don't know, the way you were mocking people with those analogies, do you really think someone would view you as a reasonable person with that attitude? I know this is the internet but sometimes people do respond appropriately to those that treat them with tact and a more neutral attitude in general. They're just going to keep fighting back so long as the other side throws at least one insult in there, and some will no matter what, but I have seen other people in this thread recognize that both sides have decent points, while still acknowledging that one is clearly the technically true one (that money has to be paid no matter what, minus trial exploits as some people have done).

If someone said "Italian and Chinese might as well be the same for all the differences I can see," it is a much different statement than "Italian and Chinese are the same because I can't tell the difference."

That "might as well be" version is kind of what the marketing version of free actually means, and what I also suggested in my post about it being a shortened version of an informal phrase. Since many beliefs are just opinions or intentionally skewed perspectives to support a premise that makes a person feel better, I related disposition to it because someone's attitude about life in general could be much more optimistic than another's, and personally I don't see anything wrong with that regarding matters like this.

The belief that something is free because it's not the primary reason to pay money in a package deal is an acceptable way of treating things in my own opinion. My actual stance I have over the bonus games is that I know if I unsubscribe that I lose what I've paid for and all, but at the same time it is nice to sometimes see something I definitely wanted like Double Dragon Neon pop up as "Free" the same day as its release. It doesn't mean I believe it to be a total gift, but for that brief moment, if I want to highlight the "Free" aspect of it, does that really not make me a reasonable person anymore?


A person isn't unreasonable for lampooning absurdities, but rather for spouting them.
I didn't come into the topic to educate anyone, and it doesn't matter to me if some children are left behind.

I agree that the way some people in the topic are using "free" is the same as the marketing version. And I think every marketer in the world would love for people to adopt that "perspective." Is it a surprise to anyone that the father of modern PR and marketing was Sigmund Freud's nephew?

In my opinion, parroting back the view marketing companies feed consumers isn't an valid "alternate perspective" on the situation. It is just being told that losing is winning and trained to believe it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XYGxWGduCCQ
---
Official Alice of the Shin Megami Tensei IV board
http://backloggery.com/shampoowarrior
#433king_maddenPosted 12/9/2012 1:09:57 AM
in any of these situations how are you losing?
#434shampoowarriorPosted 12/9/2012 1:17:56 AM
king_madden posted...
in any of these situations how are you losing?


Don't get me wrong. I have nothing against PS+ and I don't think people who subscribe to it are "losing." I don't personally, but I do believe that most PS+ subscribers are getting a really good deal. By all means, they are "winning."

But anyone who truly believes that spending money for things is the same as getting things for free is "losing." I don't think many people truly do believe that, I've just been highlighting the times when someone has made an analogous comparison.
---
Official Alice of the Shin Megami Tensei IV board
http://backloggery.com/shampoowarrior
#435LightHawKnightPosted 12/9/2012 3:18:46 AM
People still don't know what free is?! If you pay for something, no matter how little it costs, it can't be free. Cause you know? You are paying money.
---
The Official Odin of the Shin Megami Tensei IV board.
"You know how confusing the whole good-evil concept is for me."
#436MegaMettaurPosted 12/9/2012 5:01:37 AM
EffectAndCause posted...
If I hand someone $50 dollars and they hand me two games I want that are valued at $50 dollars right back AND give me even more free games, that's a free service. I didn't lose any money.


This makes no sense what so ever.
---
Now Playing (VITA): Ragnarok Oddysey, DJ Max Technika Tune (soon) PSN: Roksor.
Now Playing (PC): TalonRO
#437FrankGrimeyPosted 12/9/2012 5:21:38 AM
People are still going on about this?


It's no different from any other rental service, hell PS+ is more like Amazon Prime than anything else I've used.
---
I'm better than okay. I'm Homer Simpson.
#438EffectAndCause(Topic Creator)Posted 12/9/2012 8:47:30 AM
MegaMettaur posted...
EffectAndCause posted...
If I hand someone $50 dollars and they hand me two games I want that are valued at $50 dollars right back AND give me even more free games, that's a free service. I didn't lose any money.


This makes no sense what so ever.


If I spend 50 dollars and save 50 dollars, I break even.
---
http://i50.tinypic.com/2hdruqq.jpg
http://i47.tinypic.com/wqr38o.gif
#439king_maddenPosted 12/9/2012 11:51:12 AM
shampoowarrior posted...
king_madden posted...
in any of these situations how are you losing?


Don't get me wrong. I have nothing against PS+ and I don't think people who subscribe to it are "losing." I don't personally, but I do believe that most PS+ subscribers are getting a really good deal. By all means, they are "winning."

But anyone who truly believes that spending money for things is the same as getting things for free is "losing." I don't think many people truly do believe that, I've just been highlighting the times when someone has made an analogous comparison.



see thats the thing, they are spending money on separate things in order to get something else for free. please show me a definition where that means something cant be free.

in the case of ps+. say you wanted to buy 6 games, costing over $150. you have ps+, purchased 11 months prior, you get all those games you were going to get without paying that extra $100, so you just got access to games without paying any of their prices.

if you went to bestbuy purchased something then came back 6 months later and they gave you a tv for the item you purchased 6 months ago. is that item not free because you purchased a separate item months ago?

in the case of gamestop or people who do buy 2 get 1 free.

you pay for item
you pay for the next item
you dont pay for the last item.

you're saying that last item isnt free even though you didnt pay for it? there is nowhere that says free means the entire transaction has to be free. it just says its an item you dont pay for. paying for something to get the next thing free doesnt erase the free status of that item.
#440MetalZoicPosted 12/9/2012 12:58:53 PM
in the case of gamestop or people who do buy 2 get 1 free.

you pay for item
you pay for the next item
you dont pay for the last item.

you're saying that last item isnt free even though you didnt pay for it?


No, he's saying that item isn't free because you did have to pay for it.

To get to that last item you must pay for the first 2 items.
You cannot get the last item unless you pay first.
Having to pay anything means that something isn't free.


This is fun!