The Elder Scrolls Online won't require PS Plus, will require Xbox Live Gold

#31violentdissmayPosted 1/28/2014 1:25:48 PM
TheHunger82 posted...
I have gold so thats good then. Couldn't care less about ps4. Next.


Is it really illogical for people to not want to pay 50 bucks per year for PS+ or Live and then an additional fee for the games subscription?
It wouldnt be surprising if it gained a larger following on the PS4 than on the XB1
---
"Remember when consoles only played games? Pepperidge Farm remembers." - Broly4561
#32NSGraphitePosted 1/28/2014 1:26:54 PM
And....BOOM goes the dynamite.
---
http://m.quickmeme.com/meme/3va9jp/
I don't always Troll on the internet. But when I do, I make it the Xbox-One forums...
#33Lawboy2Posted 1/28/2014 1:31:34 PM
It's funny how every playstation owner has played don't starve and resogun for free...and now all of a sudden no one has ps+ GTFO
#34PulpPosted 1/28/2014 1:35:43 PM
Sinizta03 posted...
The Microsoft defense force is already trying to spin this as anything but "Idiotic MS policy and another reason why Microsoft needs to leave gaming". A paywall behind a paywall LOL fail.


I don't agree MS needs to leave gaming, but I do agree the paywall needs to go....but it needs to go on the PS4 too. Exclusive content, timed access to games/demos, app support, server stability -- these should be free -- the extras that entice consumers to buy your console (which already has multiple revenue streams based on the sell rate of your hardware -- Ads, royalties, DLC, etc).

I have no idea why people are paying for this...on either console.
---
Contest Abuse - You have lost the right to dispute or appeal further moderations.
#35PorungaPosted 1/28/2014 1:40:38 PM
zinsindetta posted...
You only need 1 gold membership on a console. Who really bought the Xbox One and does not plan to have gold, lol.


If and/or when I get a xbo, I will not have gold. It holds no purpose or value for me. The only reason I have plus is because it holds value beyond multiplayer. If it did not, I wouldn't have that either.
#36krystylaPosted 1/28/2014 1:42:19 PM
violentdissmay posted...
TheHunger82 posted...
I have gold so thats good then. Couldn't care less about ps4. Next.


Is it really illogical for people to not want to pay 50 bucks per year for PS+ or Live and then an additional fee for the games subscription?
It wouldnt be surprising if it gained a larger following on the PS4 than on the XB1


If someone has the money to waste it on TESO he has the money to buy live/+
---
FC: 4227 - 1514- 7752 IGN:Mara PSN: JudasInHell Gamertag: Crystyn 7B
Written by Surface Pro 2 256GB
#37ejay8320Posted 1/28/2014 1:52:47 PM(edited)
Pulp posted...
Sinizta03 posted...
The Microsoft defense force is already trying to spin this as anything but "Idiotic MS policy and another reason why Microsoft needs to leave gaming". A paywall behind a paywall LOL fail.


I don't agree MS needs to leave gaming, but I do agree the paywall needs to go....but it needs to go on the PS4 too. Exclusive content, timed access to games/demos, app support, server stability -- these should be free -- the extras that entice consumers to buy your console (which already has multiple revenue streams based on the sell rate of your hardware -- Ads, royalties, DLC, etc).

I have no idea why people are paying for this...on either console.


Outside of the multiplayer requiring PS+, PS+ is an actual service:

- Discount/coupon service: Subscribers do get a better price on PSN sale items(steam level at times)
- Cloud save service: Back up your saved files via cloud
- Instant game collection/Rental/free games(whatever you wanna call it)
- Etc.

I do agree PS+/Gold shouldn't be needed for on-line play though, but I fear the time to revert this has passed since MS got away with it for a whole generation. It's still possible but it'll be like trying to get rid of a supposed temporary tax years later.
#38leelee3105Posted 1/28/2014 1:59:30 PM
violentdissmay posted...
TheHunger82 posted...
I have gold so thats good then. Couldn't care less about ps4. Next.


Is it really illogical for people to not want to pay 50 bucks per year for PS+ or Live and then an additional fee for the games subscription?
It wouldnt be surprising if it gained a larger following on the PS4 than on the XB1


yes it makes you a cry baby, and appear very poor.
---
"I educated myself entirely on Wikipedia. I think harmless typos are a sign of stupidity."
GT je suisLe juif PSN lol!
#39CarpetfluffPosted 1/28/2014 2:12:19 PM(edited)
Every F2P game on Live needs Gold. That was part of the argument World of Tanks was having. MS basically have to do it for everyone, or for no-one, but I can't see them changing it. As they publish several F2P games themselves you would think it would be in their favour as it would up their chances to snaffle a few extra micro-transactions here and there. I get the feeling they just think it would confuse the issue about what silver and gold fundamentally are as concepts.

Mind you, ES has a monthly fee, so it's a slightly different model again. Maybe they just need to give MS a cent per user or something.
#40zephirrainesPosted 1/28/2014 2:20:38 PM
RickGotti posted...
XBox shills say: "That's a good thing"

Everyone else says, "Whaaaaaaa?"


But you should listen to the sane group. The one that tells you to be happy about it. Thanks MS


Xbox fans say: nothing new, Live has aleays been like this.

Ponies say: I would never pay to play online... For a game with a sub.... Yeah otherwise its okay now even though psn used to be free....