Eurogamer writes: "Rubbish is a serious business here in Japan. Every week I have to separate my empty plastic bottles from their very wrappers and caps, because they're not to be thrown out together - and that's before I sort my plastic from glass, glass from metal, food waste from non-food waste, and flicked-through copies of Famitsu from everything else (because paper has to go out unaccompanied, on Thursdays). And no, I can't just sneakily put everything out together: What would the neighbours think? How long would the friendly concierge remain friendly? Besides, the city council generously supplies its citizens with a 40-page pamphlet that explains in unnecessary detail every possible rubbish-related faux pas. I can have no excuses."
Nofi from TheSixthAxis writes that Sony have just released their first pay-to-play game on the PlayStation Store.
Gaming is moving towards pay to play model. Started off on a small scale with paid DLCs, charging for Home Items and now with could computing coming out of the shadows, it inevitable that the industry would move to pay to play model.
I am not sure if it would be beneficial or detrimental to gaming in general though.
Sony is just days / months ahead of its competitors. I am sure Nintendo & Microsoft (and possibly Apple) would also come up with such models in the near future.
Microsoft was already looking at a pay to play model for one of its downloadable games... Unfortunately I cannot remember the game right now.
Doesn't Microsoft already have a Pay to Play Model?
Xbox Live? Pay for a Gold Membership to play Online and Download new Demos/ betas?
This is EXACTLY like going to the arcade. Strange, gaming consoles became popular because it was a way to save money when compared to going to the arcade.
I won't look at this as a positive thing, demos are fine and free so why pay to "sample"/not own?
Arcade:
You pay for lives in fighting games but the get items in home aspect is just like winning tickets that you can buy crappy nick-nacks or candy with.
Of Trash Panic. No pay-to-play needed.
The only reason people would pay-to-play this version is to get items for Home... in which you already pay to get certain items in Home. So obviously, its catered towards the same group of people that pay for extra stuff in games/applications.
Like Sony is dipping their toes in rather than jumping in and making a big mistake. They have set the price pretty low and are doing this to reward those who want the Home rewards. No big deal to me since the game at one time was a full purchase item and even than was not appealing enough to me to buy it. It's just another business model that somebody had to try out.
Key phrase here is: "If you don't like it, don't buy it".
Dragun619: Live gets you more than just being able to "play online". It gets you cross game chat, party support and now things like 1vs100, all included in the same price. The Free accounts are free to download demos and games and all that, there's no restriction on it (apart from new demos not being downloadable for the first week).
I see this as an improved demo system, it may well be a way for devs to save cash and not have to put out demos anymore, sounds good to me.
@ Kushan... Blah, blah, blah.
Face it. You PAY money to Microsoft to PLAY online with your games. PERIOD.
Let's see how many people would continue to pay for Live if they could play online for free. Very, Very few people would...
I certainly hope this isn't the future of gaming.
It doesn't matter what way you spin it, you don't JUST "pay to play online", that's just part of it. Sure, it's the part most people are interested in, but you do get more for your money than just that.
If Silver allowed people to play online, would people pay for Gold just for Cross Game Chat, etc? Not likely.
Its nice to have some options. Even with this game, Sony offers people the options.
But with Live, you MUST pay to play online... even though its free to play the same game online on PC or PS3. I still don't get how people are willing to justify something like that.
Imagine the doom articles if Sony started charging people for stuff that are free on other systems. Hell, there's already doom articles without Sony even having to do anything wrong.
You can't say nobody would pay for it in just the same way that I can't say that everyone would still pay for it. Some people JUST want to play online, some people want cross game chat, some people want everything. I have no doubt that less people would pay for gold but I think you'd be surprised at the amount who'd want the extra features as well.
I've always said that the RRP for Live was far too high, but that's ok - you don't have to pay that price. If you look around, you can get it for half that price easily, or about £2.50 a month (or $2.50 in the US), not a large sum by any means and you do get a good service in the end.
Try to spin it any way you want but features or not you CANNOT play on live without paying and that's the bottom line.
I like the extra features Live offers, believe me. But we're not discussing whether those features are worth it or not, etc.
We're just making the point that Live is a pay-to-play service.
Your willing to spend .25/.50 in an arcade but its wrong for a console to do the same without wasting gas?
A game like this I do need, Ninja Gaiden Sigma was hard but I need a game thats actually tests my patience, and not a game on the hardest difficulity either.
By the way if someone wants to challenge me on this I've spent at least $100 on Tekken Tag Tournament arcade, $120 on DDR Extreme ($40 alone to beat Legend of Max on Standard mode) and $90 on Marvel vs Capcom; yes it does seem like a lot of money however a lot of people whine and complain about "pay to play" yet when you go to an arcade or Dave and Busters (for those who know what that is) its ok to pay to play and not think anything about it.....
"But with Live, you MUST pay to play online... even though its free to play the same game online on PC or PS3. I still don't get how people are willing to justify something like that."
My suggestion: Stop trying to get it.
I own both consoles but I use LIVE a lot more than PSN. I'm huge on communication when I play online games. PSN feels like a barren wasteland on a lot of their games online. I hate that. Call me stupid or whatever but the 2 main reasons I online game are because of
1.) The games (duh)
2.) My friends and other genuinely good gamers that I meet online (good as in good people all around -- AKA not rude/racist/jerks)
What I'm saying is LIVE's community is more connected then PSN. It's just more alive. Those who say otherwise, don't have a 360/Haven't played on LIVE. Yeah PSN is great for what it is but the communication is usually non-existent. Honestly (no joke) I think I'd LOVE PSN if Sony started packaging PS3's with headsets. It would make so much of their community come alive.
Either way, this is why I justify the measly $4 a month. I can afford to give 13 cents a day to play on LIVE. And I will continue (as millions of other will and do) to keep paying for this great service. If you hate LIVE you hate LIVE but damn it's annoying when "PS3 ONLY" people continually question justification for the service. Do you all really care that much about the things your fellow human beings spend their money on? Awwww... If so, then I'm truly touched :)
"Gaming is moving towards pay to play model."
Laughing My AO... this is so 1970s.
Pay to play or arcades were the way to go before the 2600 found its way into homes. Then came the NES and most arcades shut down.
I want to pay 10$ for a downloadable game and play 3 lives or 3000 lives if I want.
I own the full version of Trash Panic and that game is not easy. Anyone who has played it knows what I mean.
I can't even find the damn instructions on how to play the game.
It is ridiculously hard though I do agree, even though I don't know what the hell I'm doing...
Seriously, it took me at least 15 'lives' to pass the first stage.
I'm adamantly against the Pay2Play model of gaming, and will not support anything that uses it. It's a leech attached to your wallet, placed there by pure greed.
Josh Kramer: "The game is fairly expensive for a PSN title at 1500 yen (or about $15 US dollars), and that, combined with the ridiculously tough difficulty, makes it really hard to recommend. I suppose if you are absolutely dying to pick up a new puzzle game and have some extra money to spend, you could do worse. Just remember, after failing to clear Stage Five for the hundredth time in a row, be sure to throw your PS3 controller at something soft (and not your cat)."
Pros
+ Unique theme
+ Addictive, physics-based gameplay
+ Polished visuals
+ Fun multiplayer mode
+ Allows for the uploading of in-game videos directly to YouTube
Cons
- Cannot save progress in Main Mode
- Excruciatingly difficult
- Too many things to worry about in the last few stages
- Horrendously annoying title screen music
- Expensive price point
GameTrailers: "Do you follow the proper methods of waste disposal?"
