This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

Should Steam introduce an OPTIONAL ps+ style feature?

#11Majoras_pantsPosted 12/29/2013 6:17:36 AM
It completely depends on if we' dbe giving anything up for it. Valve has a lot they are working on, and if this would put them behind or stop them from putting certain games ons ale, then I'd be against it. Why would I want a paid rental service when they give good enough deals to buy games and get to keep them for the same cost?

Unless it's more like Games for Gold on Xbox where you actually get to keep/own the game, which is a little better.

But even then, why? But I'm sure some people would be interested I guess. So if it didn't stop anything from ever going on sale as a result and they hired a few people to design and run it so it didn't get in the way of anything else Valve is working on, go for it.
---
"What's a strategy game? You mean like Mass Effect?"- A console gamer
#12Callmege(Topic Creator)Posted 12/29/2013 6:19:48 AM
aak57 posted...
I dunno, unless these games would be new releases I don't see many people signing up to pay $10 for a couple random games.


I've never been a ps+ subscriber but from what I've heard from friends who do, the games that are offered are usually quite good. And then in some cases, when the offer on ps+ ran out they went and bought the game.

I'm not sure I get why opposition to what would be an entirely optional feature is so strong...

Plus, Steam could team the subscription up with deals. As soon as a game comes off the subscription they stick it in a deal so that those who played it during the subscription window don't feel too stung by then having to buy it if they want to keep playing.

Just so long as there weren't Steam+ only deals. That would piss me off.
---
God save our gracious Queen, Long live our noble Queen, God save the Queen!
not changing this sig until we have a King - started: 30/8/2008
#13Majoras_pantsPosted 12/29/2013 6:22:19 AM
Callmege posted...
aak57 posted...
I dunno, unless these games would be new releases I don't see many people signing up to pay $10 for a couple random games.


I've never been a ps+ subscriber but from what I've heard from friends who do, the games that are offered are usually quite good. And then in some cases, when the offer on ps+ ran out they went and bought the game.

I'm not sure I get why opposition to what would be an entirely optional feature is so strong...

Plus, Steam could team the subscription up with deals. As soon as a game comes off the subscription they stick it in a deal so that those who played it during the subscription window don't feel too stung by then having to buy it if they want to keep playing.

Just so long as there weren't Steam+ only deals. That would piss me off.


The opposition is more because like any other business, they would try to encourage you to sign up. And to do that they would probably avoid putting the free rental games into daily or flash sales to make them more attractive. And like i said, it might shift their focus away from some of their current projects, like their streaming beta.
---
"What's a strategy game? You mean like Mass Effect?"- A console gamer
#14Callmege(Topic Creator)Posted 12/29/2013 6:22:46 AM
Yeah the only way I'd be happy with this is if it was an extra feature, not something that replaced or limited anything Steam already does. That's what I was getting at with the optional aspect.
---
God save our gracious Queen, Long live our noble Queen, God save the Queen!
not changing this sig until we have a King - started: 30/8/2008
#15Majoras_pantsPosted 12/29/2013 6:26:31 AM
Right, and while that's extremely unlikely, almost everything comes at a cost, even indirectly. But if they did it right, by having a few people dedicated to it and completely ignored it otherwise so it didn't effect deals at all, then yeah I'd be fine with it. I wouldn't subscribe, unless it had constant great games and it was like Games for Gold instead of PSN+ in which case I'd consider it.
---
"What's a strategy game? You mean like Mass Effect?"- A console gamer
#16TropicMoon10Posted 12/29/2013 6:26:36 AM
PSN+ used to be optional but I wouldn't call it that anymore, since you kinda need it to play games online now.
---
http://i.imgur.com/N9lTE.jpg
#17Majoras_pantsPosted 12/29/2013 6:29:25 AM
Yeah, he said like it was on PS3, which was optional.

Still a very flawed system, in that it gave you the option to buy games slightly cheaper and gave you rentals (that had a subscription cost) and called them gifts.
---
"What's a strategy game? You mean like Mass Effect?"- A console gamer
#18aak57Posted 12/29/2013 6:37:47 AM(edited)
Callmege posted...
aak57 posted...
I dunno, unless these games would be new releases I don't see many people signing up to pay $10 for a couple random games.


I've never been a ps+ subscriber but from what I've heard from friends who do, the games that are offered are usually quite good. And then in some cases, when the offer on ps+ ran out they went and bought the game.

I'm not sure I get why opposition to what would be an entirely optional feature is so strong...

Plus, Steam could team the subscription up with deals. As soon as a game comes off the subscription they stick it in a deal so that those who played it during the subscription window don't feel too stung by then having to buy it if they want to keep playing.

Just so long as there weren't Steam+ only deals. That would piss me off.

Well, what I was getting at more so is that for consoles, things like PS+ are good because the sales aren't anything like what you get with steam. By the time a game would be added to Steam+ you could probably just buy it for the cost of the subscription. And of course, that's even assuming you have interest in any of the couple games they choose for the month. If not then you're paying $10 just to have access to the games you've acquired. Of course, this isn't why it's a bad thing and shouldn't exist, I'm just saying I dunno how many people would actually be hyped.

What I do think would be bad is that it could open the idea of "well what if S+ subscribers get bigger discounts on games" and the like. I know everyone loves valve, but they are a business and they're not actually our best friends. I could easily see something like Hitman Absolution having been 80% off during this sale for S+ members but maybe 66% off for non-members.
---
http://i.imgur.com/ULj4q.jpg
Let strength be granted, so the world might be mended.
#19ViperEO2Posted 12/29/2013 8:42:23 AM
I have PS Plus also but don't think it would work with Steam. $50 on Steam can get you a lot of games right now during a sale, and they will be games you specifically want yourself. PS Plus is the best console deal for people without a PC.
#20arleasPosted 12/29/2013 8:56:34 AM
The thing is, when Valve wants to tempt you to buy a game, they give you a free weekend on that game... no $9.99 fee required. downloading and playing that is optional AND it's free. I'd rather save $10 a month and then use that money to buy a game I actually want rather than wasting $10 a month for games I probably have no interest in.
---
http://raptr.com/badge/arleas/uc.png
http://www.speedtest.net/result/2868545294.png