Multiplayer should be free like PS3.

#1KMacz31Posted 7/11/2014 10:41:24 AM(edited)
I think gamers oughta fought back against it. Yes PS+ gives free games, but if you don't have much free time nor are they interesting you, it doesn't really make it up. You're gonna have to feel obligated to play them just to feel it's worth it, and buy games at discount just to feel it's worth it.

I never seen the gaming community just lay back and take it when they increase fees for something that was already free. It's a matter of principle, not whether we can afford the PS+ subscription. Ppl were all jumping on Microsoft about their anti-consumerist policies, well I think people missed on this fight.
#2Draconas_LyrrPosted 7/11/2014 10:45:53 AM
I had PS+ pre-PS4, I'm not going to get rid of something I really like to fight back against something that doesn't bother me. Doesn't mean I like that they started charging for playing online, though, it just isn't a big enough issue.
---
PSN: Draconas_Lyrr
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but that doesn't mean it's an intelligent opinion.
#3tiger8191Posted 7/11/2014 10:46:15 AM
So should my mortgage and car payments. Insurance as well!!!!
---
www.twitch.tv/fearsomebeaver
#4sworderPosted 7/11/2014 10:48:10 AM
lol at thinking you have a choice

it's either deal with it or stop playing multiplayer
#5AxleHeadXPosted 7/11/2014 10:51:08 AM
The big thing here is that money is required for maintaining such a massive network. Neither Sony or Microsoft have to offer online capability, but if it is going to then of course a fee will be charged for maintenance. Sony tried the free PSN on PS3 and it was very lackluster honestly. One year of PS+ can be had for as little as $39.99. Thats a little over $3 dollars a month. I don't see the problem here.
#63D3Posted 7/11/2014 10:54:15 AM
Not gonna happen, millions of people are already plus members.
---
Because Naughty Dog
Joel+Ellie=Jelly...You Jelly?
#7SheepinatorPosted 7/11/2014 10:56:01 AM
Tens of millions signed up for Live.

Sony said PS4 would introduce fee for online, sales soared, millions of new PS+ subs sold.

The market has spoken.
---
My mad face and my happy face are the same.
#8AceMagasePosted 7/11/2014 10:57:55 AM
still waiting on those promised network improvements sony...
#9KMacz31(Topic Creator)Posted 7/11/2014 10:58:15 AM
AxleHeadX posted...
The big thing here is that money is required for maintaining such a massive network. Neither Sony or Microsoft have to offer online capability, but if it is going to then of course a fee will be charged for maintenance. Sony tried the free PSN on PS3 and it was very lackluster honestly. One year of PS+ can be had for as little as $39.99. Thats a little over $3 dollars a month. I don't see the problem here.


But steam doesn't need a subscription. PS+ online is still peer to peer for games that don't use dedicated servers. It's the same thing as PS3 MP, except now you have to pay. Yes theres party chat, but that was limited by the PS3's hardware issues.

In terms of online, pretty much everything is the same.
#10KMacz31(Topic Creator)Posted 7/11/2014 11:05:48 AM(edited)
Sheepinator posted...
Tens of millions signed up for Live.

Sony said PS4 would introduce fee for online, sales soared, millions of new PS+ subs sold.

The market has spoken.


If you think about it, what other option was there? No competition for Sony, Xbone wasn't great, Wii U was terrible, gamers were going to move to PS4 anyways. People had to buy PS+ anyways to get maximal use of ps4. If Sony offered MP as free, would you think PS+ sales would go up as dramatically?

If right now Wii U had better hardware, better 3rd party support on par with PS4, Xbone, like during the SNES, Genesis stage, I would jump on the Wii U in a heartbeat because it has no MP fees. The problem is not that the "market has spoken," it's that the competition on the market is terrible.