After Issues With PSN, Is PS+ Really Worthy of Being a Premium And Mandatory For Online Service?

Let’s take a trip back in time. Back to when the Xbox players had to pay for their online services and Playstation players didn’t. Xbox had the more stable services, with more updates and a better quality of life and the Playstation had a somewhat unstable service that wasn’t updated all that often, but it was free! Everything seemed to balance itself out in the end and consumers on both ends were fairly happy with how it all ran. Then Playstation made PS+ mandatory if you owned a PS4. Let’s talk about how this changed the way that Playstation looked and felt.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
dead_pixels1229d ago

Of course it is. You get multiple free games per month, discounted pricing on titles and a service that, for the most part, is very stable.

Network problems happen. They suck, and we deal. Does it happen to Sony more than the competition? Sure. But to deny the service's value is ludicrous.

xHeavYx1229d ago

PSN went down for a few hours! Get the pitchforks ready!
Silly people.

pompombrum1229d ago

For the second time in the span of a week. Not the end of the world but ultimately can't help but feel Sony could be doing better, especially in light of the downtime from the Christmas day attack.

wynams1229d ago

for the third time since friday, but tell us how expecting decent uptime is entitlement ... all ears #not

iTechHeads1228d ago

It's gone down multiple times within the past week though. This isn't normal, even for PSN.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1228d ago
Volkama1229d ago (Edited 1229d ago )

They aren't really questioning ps plus as a "free" games service though. Questioning why it is mandatory for online play is fair enough. Particularly when the likes of EA, Activision, Ubisoft and even some smaller studios provide multiplayer servers.

Is the service better than when it was optional last gen? Is it better than the free services on PC?

Personally I think both Plus and Gold being mandatory is a crock. The services don't offer any feature or enhanced quality multiplayer worth paying for above and beyond the price of the console and game.

They're both games rental services right now. Which is fine, but we should have a choice over whether we think they're worth subscribing to on that merit.

reallyNow1229d ago

Do you know for certain that it wasn't these big publishers who pressured Sony to charge for PS+ to offset their costs? How do you know Microsoft doesn't have a similar arrangement? Just because someone doesn't talk about something doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Publisher relations is a huge web of deals and agreements. It wouldn't surprise me in the least.

AD7051229d ago

I agree with you. Sure the free games are nice and all but there are some flaws with that.

Most of these free games are pretty crappy and the moment you stop paying for PS+ you lose all access to them. It just seems you're better off just buying them Instead of having to continually pay for a service just to keep them.

The main reason I made a psn and xbl account was to play games online with friends. Not to get a few free games that are held hostage. Not to mention there aren't a whole lot of multiplayer games to play on the PS4 right now that I can't find somewhere else. Unless you want to play driveclub or KZ shadowfall whose online communities are practically dead.

They need to start adding some unique multiplayer experiences. Give people a reason to play online on PSN.

Kleptic1229d ago (Edited 1229d ago )

Its very likely some publishers were pushing sony to expand subscriber numbers before getting into specific deals for certain games...but i don't think any publishers were outright pushing Sony to charge to play online...As Valve and other publishers/devs were saying last gen; that was one of Sony's major it didn't limit accessibility for multiplayer behind yet another needed subscription...

its just...that was the best way to do it...blame MS; XBL's popularity with making users pay for the internet twice is exactly why it happened...Had 2013's E3 gone differently for MS, who unanimously dropped all competitive leverage they had on a single press conference...had MS put up even a remotely decent fight back then, i'm pretty sure that bullet list of PS+ features at the end of Sony's E3...wouldn't have had 'access to online multiplayer' on there...remember how quietly it was slipped under the radar?...they found a perfect moment to let it through, and my guess is they had been sitting on that for quite a while...

MS is still trying to dig out of that hole...and had they not fallen in it, Sony wouldn't have had any realistic way to implement a similar pay wall...w/e overall, i don't care...i'm not a PS+ subscriber only because i just haven't found a lot of games lately that i care about playing...not because of its netflix like price...but to have Sony come out a year later and boast about PS+ sub increases of 800% or whatever...thats pushing it...they forced users to do it, then act like people did it for the 'value'...not in the slightest...

nucky641229d ago (Edited 1229d ago )

i downloaded styx today. it's a 29.99 game and i get to play for free - not to mention the other 11 months of free games and discounts. i paid 36 dollars for a 1 year ps+ card on ebay.
I'm happy with the value. if it's down sometimes, i'll get by. smh

bradfh1229d ago

psn went down 4 times this month i demand one month free service

poor_cus_of_games1229d ago

Maybe check your Internet connection. Psn hasn't been down 4 times this month.

blackblades1229d ago

With ps+ people only mention the the free games, then online but nothing else. To me the cloud is the most important thing. My ExHDD screwed over and if I had all my saves on that hmm.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1228d ago
ShinMaster1229d ago (Edited 1229d ago )

These articles haven't gotten old yet?
I swear, I thought I saw at least one or two articles talking about the same thing.

PS Plus is best when you have more than just a PS4. Since its service extends to other PS systems as well, so you get the best deal.

I'm sorry for those who are having problems. Personally, I've been on all day every day.

Rimeskeem1229d ago

You can ask the samething about XBL. It does have issues, practically every network service will have issues. Does that make them not premium services? Hell no.

dead_pixels1229d ago (Edited 1229d ago )

Well said. It boggles my mind how easily some people overlook how quickly services like PS+ and Live Gold pay for themselves through bonus content and other subscriber bells and whistles. And anyone who thinks these massive online networks would be any better without subscription revenue to prop them up is wholly out of touch.

Death1229d ago

If Games with Gold and PS+ were optional I wouldn't pay for either. The games only give them value if you actually want the games available. I have zero interest in indie games. On PS+ I've downloaded and played Injustice and I've downloaded Infamous First Light. Games with Gold hasn't faired much better for me, but it's worked out for my kids Xbox 360 and Xbox One. I owned most of the games available so far, but I also now have a way to play with my kid without buying additional copies of the games I already had.

With that said I have no issue paying for online multiplayer for either system, but I do expect the services to work well for the money. I don't see either having enough outages where I feel I'm not getting my moneys worth. I use my PS4 primarily for exclusive games and won't renew my Plus unless an absolute must have online exclusive releases.

Volkama1229d ago

Is battlefield 4 multiplayer better on console than PC? Project Cars? COD? TESO? Is voice chat better? Do you get more online storage space? Do the games have additional multiplayer features?

The advantage from paying isn't so easy to see imo.

Death1229d ago


It's ease of use that makes it better. To be able to power on my console and see who is online, what they are doing, send an invite for games or chat regardless what they are doing, etc. makes it worth the price. I have very little time to sit down and game as it is. I don't want to spend what time I have making arrangements to play. I also don't want to spend the time getting everything setup and making sure we are all compatible with each other.

andibandit1229d ago (Edited 1229d ago )


But can't you more or less do those things in Steam as well, I know i generally check what friends are playing in Steam and Origin.

Volkama1229d ago

That's an advantage of a closed platform Death. An advantage of the lack of choice. That simplicity isn't enabled by your subscription fee, and lack of choice has significant disadvantages as well (check out the prices on those digital stores for example) That's not really the discussion though .

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1229d ago
FoxyGotGame1229d ago (Edited 1229d ago )

Unless you game exclusively on PC, there's not many other options . PSN/Xbox Live both have their ups 'n downs.

PS+/GWG offer variable quality monthly games and I don't have a gaming PC. PC online access is free, games cost less which is a bonus for them. Yeah we're getting ripped off lol /

Chaosdreams1229d ago

Paying for online has and always will be, a scam. Sure, they throw "free incentives" which paint over the ugly truth, however once you stop paying for ps+ you lose access to all those games / the ability to play online in general.

If we are paying for our online functionality in general (say to go on our laptops or whatever) then the notion that we have to fork over even more money just to access "online" on the console we just spent a lot of cash on, not to mention the cost of games, is irritating.

Console + game + season passes / dlc / micro transactions, and still, you want online? That'll be another $59.99. But hey, here's some free games (which you will never own, but you can borrow) to shut your complaints up.

Don't like it? Don't buy a game that uses online, or EVEN REQUIRES IT.

So, servers going down. Unacceptable.

Show all comments (53)
The story is too old to be commented.