Hey Xbox, Stop Embarrassing Yourselves With ‘Games With Gold’

An opinion piece via EGMR in which the author expresses his frustration at the inferior-by-comparison Games with Gold offering from Xbox, comparing it to the far superior PlayStation Plus offering.

Quote: "Currently you can purchase a 1-year Xbox LIVE Gold Subscription for R425 which will grant you the ability to play multiplayer games online, invite people to party chats and partake in special weekly sales, with the Games with Gold offering also made available to you, granting you two free games per month. Alternatively if you have a PlayStation 3, 4 or Vita, you could purchase a 1-year PlayStation Plus Subscription for R500 which will grant you the ability to automatically download game and system updates as well as demos, play online on PS4, while also allowing you to partake in special weekly sales, with the Instant Games Collection also made available to you, granting you a selection of free games per month."

Oculus Quest Giveaway! Click Here to Enter
The story is too old to be commented.
Mikelarry2182d ago (Edited 2182d ago )

Just a word to the author the ps4 now offers party chat so you can strike that off as an advantage of xbox live over psn. as for games with gold i don't even bother as the games that they have offered the whole approach was just a knee jerk reaction to try to save face about having to charge customers $60 with no value. they keep trying to push the " psplus is just rentals" but with the games psplus offers me and other discounts i get from signing up with the service i will not be ending my subscription anytime soon

DeathOfTheFanBoy2182d ago

If dedicated servers are "no value" then fair enough.

They have given out some great games to be fair, and games I would have never given a 2nd glance but got to enjoy them because they were free. Just because a game is old does not mean it's crap.

GarrusVakarian2182d ago

"Just because a game is old does not mean it's crap."

Agree completely, Halo 3 and AC2 were/are great games. But there's no denying MS need to step up GWG, it's embarrassing when compared to PS plus.

AaronPS2182d ago

No but crap games are crap, regardless of age


Any free game is a good game if you look at it that way.

If the games they are giving out now are games you have not played and would not have considered, then I can only guess you have not had a 360 for long. I mean what reason would you have for missing halo 3 or AC2 when they came out back in the day?

As for most of the other games the reason you would have mostly been looked over by most people is because they were never worth looking at in the first place.

WeAreLegion2182d ago

Dedicated servers? There are just as many PS4 games using dedicated servers as XBO games.

Ittoryu2182d ago

It is if every game they have given out was already something you own or beat because it's 6 to 7 years old.

Hatsune-Miku2182d ago

The approaches of games with gold and ps plus are representations of the game systems themselves.

Games with gold is pure rubbish and it's a bit insulting to core gamers with common sense. The games offered are outdated with a lack of interest for the games themselves.

Ps plus offers a great lot of deals from free games which are fairly new, access to betas, deals on new digital games and more.

Ps4 is the future and the future is ps4

kenshiro1002182d ago

Its embarrassing to give games out that are six to seven years old and hold no relevance to gaming now. That's like Sony offering me a Barbie game that came out six to seven years ago instead of modern/not too old games.

Thank God they don't do that nonsense either way.

Thegamer412182d ago


"Just because a game is old does not mean it's crap."

The reason people complain about them giving us old games is not because of the quality of the game.
Yes, there are some good games regardless of their age, but you could buy them at dirt cheap prices, sometimes cheaper than £1. So anyone that actually wanted to play these games would have bought them for that price.

cleft52182d ago

Games with Gold gives me a chuckle every time I see what Microsoft is giving people compared to Sony, it really is laughable. I have to imagine it is because you get to keep the games if you stop paying for Xbox Live. Even so, for a company as wealthy as Microsoft to constantly be handing it's loyal fanbase a bunch of hand me down does seem off. I own a 360, but feel zero compulsion to keep Xbox Live or even buy it at a discount. Meanwhile, I will never part with my PS+ account, primarily because I would lose all my games if I did but also because the constant new games Sony offers is top notch. We got Metro Last Light people, that's all I am going to say.

theshonen88992182d ago

Might not be crap but it sure is crap value.

redwin2182d ago

Yep, my ps+ games are better than my games with gold games. The ps is more powerful than the Xbox one but I still use my Xbox one a lot . I remember when Sony was a pain in the &&@!. I remember when they said that you don't need to play online, they said that you don't need to party chat, I remember when Sony said that people will gladly pay $800 for the ps3 so they won't change the price, I remember when sony's controller was going to look like a "bat boomerang " I remember when Sony didn't want to publish western games because they said that they are inferior and all Japanese games are better. Now MS changed all that and Sony changed their tone. Remember when Sony said you shouldn't pay for online gaming ? Well, they now have ps+ and coming out with PSnow . None of this is wrong, it's all normal, it's all a natural progression and we make these companies evolve, we do that with our wallets. But when you insult someone because they like the other system, you make them resent the platform because they are associating it with you and that's how a "hater" is born .$ talks, buy or not buy, that's what these companies understand.

Giul_Xainx2182d ago

I need to issue this headline a citation..... it is an eye catcher. Get me the internet police.....

+ Show (9) more repliesLast reply 2182d ago
rdgneoz32182d ago

If you have a PS4 only, you're basically geting 1 free game a month and to play MP (though F2P and MMOs don't need it). If you have a PS3, you're getting 2 or 3 games. Vita is usually around 2. So if you're a multi system user, you're getting a huge amount of games (around 5 or 6 a month) that are relatively new for a good price. $50 for a year at most (sometimes find discounts), so less than $4.17 a month for 5 or 6 games. And the sales they have save you another good chunk of change.

mhunterjr2182d ago (Edited 2182d ago )

To be fair , PSplus was a knee-jerk reaction from Sony, who's console was the second choice for online multiplayer... Coming out towards the end of the PS3 era, It was a simply brilliant way to ease their customers into paying for multiplayer on ps4.

Without xbox live, there would have never been a ps plus. In fact, Sony was actually against a unified network until Xbox live took off, so really you can thank MS for pushing Sony to create PSN.

Gotta love competition.

That said, games with gold is a joke. MS would be better off to offer nothing at all. They should feel pretty embarrassied offering games no one ever wanted to play, while Sony account holders are getting recent hits.

Mikelarry2182d ago

I am glad xbox live took off and i am even more glad that MS made Sony buckle down and improve on its service. i would also want MS to see what sony is doing right and try to implement and improve on those aspects to keep sony in check.

Raf1k12182d ago


TBH, I'd have preferred it if Xbox Live didn't take off and was scrapped in favor of free online access. This way none of us would be needing to pay to play online with a console which is how it should be but isn't.

bleedsoe9mm2182d ago (Edited 2182d ago )

i think a good way for ms to get aggressive competing with + would be giving BIG day 1 digital purchase discounts for gold subscribers, it would also help the transfer to digital which is what they wanted all along

mhunterjr2182d ago (Edited 2182d ago )


I think a totally free, but unified service would be unsustainable.

1) Sony's initial online service on ps2 was a mess. You had a unique log ins for each game, couldn't get cross game invitations, and each company handled chat differently (or didn't have it at all). People were actually holding conference calls so they could coordinate with their teams.
2) things improved with the ps3, but the economics just didn't work. They were sinking money into a service that wasn't netting them any more customers than their competitor. The month long outage complicated matters even further. Now they had to pay a huge some of money to make up for poor security and infrastructure. Thats THE reason PS+ exists.

It was after the outtage that Sony admirtted that they can't afford provide the network customers want and deserve without some sort of recurring revenue. So I disagree. Without xbl, PSN probably would not be as awesome as it is today.

Killzoner992182d ago

"To be fair , PSplus was a knee-jerk reaction from Sony, who's console was the second choice for online multiplayer"

Nope. Not even close. Sony was offering FREE online that exceeded what Microsoft was offering. Somehow Sony found a way to make it even better with PS+ but Microsoft has nothing to do with it. Don't label Sony's genius idea as a "knee-jerk reaction" when it has been in the works for a very long time.

mhunterjr2182d ago (Edited 2182d ago )


Not sure why I'm responding to an obvious fanboy, but you must not know your history. Sony's online 'service' on ps2 was awful when compared to MS.... . Basically, every publisher ran their own service, quality varied , and there was no cross-game support. That's why they copied EVERYTHING about xbox live when they created PSN. from the single username, to the achievements. If you think that was BETTER than what Xbox had, you are on crack.

PS+ came about because Sony's free service was LOSING THEM MONEY. So much so, that they were failing to invest in security and infrastructure, which lead to frequent downtime, including 1 month long outtage. PS+ was created so that Sony could have the capital to invest in a service that is a secure and stabile as Microsofts. If you don't see that as being reactionary, you are blind.

Sony was backed into a wall by MS' superior service, and THAT'S the ONLY reason they have come out with a better one today.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 2182d ago
PONTIAC08G8GT2182d ago (Edited 2182d ago )

Not sure why anyone pays full price for Xbox Live or any online service. I'll be honest, I've never downloaded one free game on Xbox. Not because they haven't been decent games, but I have no desire to play old titles. Even on PS4, I think Uncharted 3 is coming out soon for PS+, but the game is well over a year old and majority of PS owners have probably played it already. Borderlands 2 is about 2 years old. And I'm not into Indie games. I pay $35 a year to play online with my friends and against good competition, anything extra on top of that is just a bonus.

WeAreLegion2182d ago

Uncharted 3 was free last year on Plus.

VENOMACR12272182d ago


Until companies release relevant new age games, it's not a big deal to me. I'm same way, I pay a subscription to play games online. And you can find great deals on subscription through Amazon and eBay. Plus, you can only rent games on PS, where you can keep them on Xbox.

mhunterjr2182d ago

I really want to know how Sony secures these deals. Please don't belittle the service because they games they offer are at a great value, even if they are a year old. Most of them are 70+ on metacritic and they offer several games a month. If I'm not mistaken Bioshock Infinate was on their recently.

The deal is so good, in fact, I'm surprised publishers participate. How long until folks start saying "I'm not gonna buy that game at launch, I'll just wait til it hits ps+". I'd really like to get a look at the economics behind it all.

BX812182d ago

$60 with no value? The whole point of charging online isn't to provide free games. It's to provide console gamers with a platform which to connect with each other and play MP hole turning a profit. Make no mistake Sony doesn't do it. Because they are kind souls. They do it because it makes them money. So yeah the core value is there. Would newer free games be nice? Yeah but I pay the fee to play mp and party chat.

Mikelarry2182d ago (Edited 2182d ago )

" Make no mistake Sony doesn't do it. Because they are kind souls"

no where in my comment did i even hint that. Sony is offering all these "incentives" why to keep their customers loyal. if a customer buys a good/ services and you throw in something that they perceive as good value they will keep coming back and wouldn't mind parting with their cash i understand this concept. Sony is doing it the right way while MS are still trying to find their balance with this approach. when psplus started i never paid for the service because then i didn't see no value and when i did see this after a couple of months i started paying for it

BX812182d ago

I wasn't implying that's what you were saying. It was more of a general comment. I also agree that as far as bonus games Sony is teaching MS a thing or two. I'm just saying the whole point of charging $50-$60 is so gamers can play online MP, so the core value is there from the start. Now as far as bonuses that's adding to the core value. So yeah. Again I wasn't trying to make it seem like that's what you were saying. I was just generalizing. Thanks for your time.

DC7772182d ago (Edited 2182d ago )

I don't see the difference between the two. They don't actually have to give you anything.

I see the KZ resolution article disappeared quick overnight.

I don't even like MS but I like biased corruption and blind fanboyism even less.

FlunkinMonkey2182d ago (Edited 2182d ago )

Desperately clutching on to some off topic news there, mate.. Nice try, it's about time you have something minor to cling on to, i expect to see you write something similar and off topic in some other news (o wait, you already have).

You don't see the difference between what both services are giving? Then you my friend, are what they call 'blind with delusion'.


hankmoody2182d ago

Seems like people disagree with you. Biased corruption and blind fanboyism isn't so bad in their eyes, I guess.

Back-to-Back2182d ago

"I don't see the difference between the two. They don't actually have to give you anything"

Microsoft has this sheep fooled.

keabrown792182d ago

Also keep in mind, while it does have party chat, the party chat sound quality is nowhere as good as the xbox chat sound quality. In the end PS+ is just rentals as the discounts you get, unless you buy more then a couple of things a month are negated by the cost of the per month service. This being said, I see no problem with a rental service.

DARK WITNESS2182d ago (Edited 2182d ago )

What are you talking about?

I have both systems and the sound quality is just as good! Some of the headsets pick up a bit too much sound but that's an issue with the headset not the quality of the audio in party.

Given that most people wont have a reason to be cancelling their PS+ year in year out the fact that it's a rental means almost zero.

would people rather "rent" a reasonably new(new enough to at least have some interest still going for them) game for an unlimited amount of time or download the games that are so old nobody plays them anyway or are so crap nobody cares about them?

Regis2182d ago

I have more problems with Xbox's 1 party chat over PS4s recently. Party chat keeps turning off and I don't even know why they added a on/off button for party chat it should be a default on.

keabrown792182d ago

LOL the disagree's even when the PS4 is my console of choice this gen. @Dark Witness, the Xbox One uses the Skype codec which sounds excellent compared to my PS4 chat. It's just a better codec is all. I do agree with you however that I'd rather pay for a rental service that gives me newer games, not just indies so I hope that changes at some point to be like the PS3's offerings, than get old games that I probably already have played.


It maybe a better codec, I am not saying it is not... how does that translate to what I hear through my headset is what matters to me.

Again, I have both systems, I have been in party chat on both systems. I repeat the audio I hear through my headset on the ps4 does not sound in anyway inferior to my "naked" ear.

it's as simple as that.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2182d ago
gamer20132182d ago (Edited 2182d ago )

XBL still offers (and always will) better quality, reliability and performance. XBL is and always will be the gold standard for online console gaming, every real gamer knows this.

Giving away newer games for free is probably part of the reason why Sony are bleeding out so much money. Plus, there are only so many of those games that the average subscriber would want to play anyway. I thought that this was a desperate strategy back when it was first announced for the PS3 with PSN+ and I still think it is with the PS4.

calis2182d ago

So much misinformation I thought I was reading Greenburg again.

HacSawJimThugin2182d ago

@ mikelarry Does it offer cross game chat also?

HacSawJimThugin2182d ago

@Mikelarry it's not as smooth as Live but at least it's a start.

rafaman2182d ago

Now that PS4 has party chat, I bet everyione loves it, but in the days of 360 Live vs PS3 PSN, no one seem to care and people would say this wasnt an advantage. lol

About dedicated servers, only those who play ,multiplayer, especially the ones cross ocean, knows how great it is to have it.

LexHazard792182d ago

You wont be ending your subscription because you wouldnt be able to play online on most games now! Not because you have choice! Or are you gonna tell me you dont need PS+ to truly take advantage of PSN and PS platform!

+ Show (8) more repliesLast reply 2182d ago
Emrage2182d ago

games for gold is a lot better than ps plus imo

mantisimo2182d ago

That's fine emrage I hope you enjoy them ima be on +.

Emrage2182d ago

dead nation, outlast, dont starve, resogun, contrast. aren't good

Rainstorm812182d ago

What about Bioshock infinite, DMC, LBP2, Uncharted 3, Metro Last Light, Borderlands 2, Grid 2, Tomb Raider, Street Fighter 4....?????

Nothing good in there either? I can keep going not even halfway through the list of games given to PS+ members .....

Jdoki2182d ago


Dead Nation, Resogun and Don't Starve are awesome.

To each their own, but I would have paid for Resogun and Dead Nation if I didn't have a PS+ account (any game by Housemarque gets my attention). And I have previously purchased Don't Starve on PC.

Throw in the games that are on PS3 / Vita as part of PS+ and things look very good.

darren_poolies2182d ago

Can I have some of what you're smoking please?

supes_242182d ago

You've got to be kidding me, right? Please explain as to why you think "games with gold" is better. It's obvious that it's an inferior service based on the free games offered alone.

Emrage2182d ago

games for gold games last longer

supes_242182d ago

Last longer how? In the download que? They stay there at least a month. If you download it, you have it till you delete it and can still download it again. So invalid argument on your part.

mantisimo2182d ago

"Games for gold last longer"

What from when they were published to when they appear on gold?

Jdoki2182d ago (Edited 2182d ago )


By 'lasts longer' I assume you mean that you get to keep them on GwG vs 'renting' them through PS+?

If so, I don't see a huge difference. I have had a PS+ account from almost day 1. So those games are always there for me. I don't intend to get rid of my Plus account any time soon, so to all intents and purposes those games are mine.

Also, even if I cancel my Plus account those games stay in my download list - but are not accessible. So if I ever resubscribe they are all still there.

LeCreuset2182d ago

Bottom line: PS+ IGC saves you from buying current games. GWG lets you keep old, cheap games which you already have, by now, if you had any real interest in them.

gamer20132182d ago (Edited 2182d ago )

I personally don't think that it's better but completely ignoring the fact that we actually get to actually keep the XBL games is really stupid.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 2182d ago
GarrusVakarian2182d ago (Edited 2182d ago )

I guess that's your opinion, but a lot of people are going to prefer -

Bioshock Infinite
Uncharted 3
Borderlands 2
Metro Last Light
LBP Go Karting
X-com Enemy Unknown

(all of the above (and more) are available to me right now if i turn on my PS4/4)


Civilization Revolution
Dungeon Crawler.

"games for gold games last longer"

Huh? You would rather keep Civ Rev than rent Bioshock Infinite? You would rather keep Dungeon Crawler than rent Borderlands 2? As long as you keep your PS plus sub, you get to keep those games.....and why would anyone cancel their PS plus sub if games of those calibre keep getting added? To think GWG is better purely because you get to keep the games is crazy talk, people need to stop fooling themselves believing that keep>>>rent.

"dead nation, outlast, dont starve, resogun, contrast. aren't good"

Nevermind, move along people. Nothing to see here.

BX812182d ago

Are you saying you can play all those on ps4 without a ps3? If so, then how? I just got my ps4 but due to killzones stale mp it's kinda just sitting there. I do like that free psn game. I forget what it's called. Outlast I think?

Jdoki2182d ago (Edited 2182d ago )

No. Think Lukas made a typo. He meant to say PS3/4

PS+ PS3 games are only available on PS3. Same for PS4.

However, if you access the Sony store online you do have the option of buying or downloading any Vita, PS3, PS4 title to the respective system. I have started to use this more than the online stores on each console / handheld.

It is especially useful to use the online store for PS4 games, as I can start the games downloading remotely.

BX812182d ago

Aghhhh, lol. I was getting excited to play borderlands 2 again on ps4. I thought maybe you could go to download it to your library and access it from the ps4 library tab. I don't know psn as well as I do xbl... Clearly lol. Thanks for clearing that up.

Jdoki2182d ago


That might change when Gakai is finally launched... :)

It would be nice to think that Sony could check the PS3 games we have purchased via PS+ or on the store and give us the streaming versions of those playable on PS4

xDHAV0K24x2182d ago

some of those games are blockbusters. You don't think a majority of ps owners have them/played them by now?

GarrusVakarian2182d ago (Edited 2182d ago )


Haha, sorry, i meant PS3/4 :)


"some of those games are blockbusters. You don't think a majority of ps owners have them/played them by now?"

Of course, but there will always be people who have yet to play them.

calis2182d ago

"Of course, but there will always be people who have yet to play them."

Of that list you provided, I have only played Uncharted 3.

I have tonnes of games to catch up on. I wanted to buy Tomb Raider and Metal Gear Rising at some point but since I've been on holiday for the past 8 months they've come on for free so I've saved money.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 2182d ago
SoulSercher6202182d ago

Because you're biased and haven't played any of the PS4's free games I'm guessing?


Nice try pal, nice try...

Kivespussi2182d ago

You know people... If you wouldn't reply to trolls they wouldn't take half of the comment section. It'd be nice to see you know... Actual opinions on the article

LeCreuset2182d ago

Proof that the talking point, of a competitive Xbox being good for gaming, is false. When you have people so brand loyal that they'll say "games for gold is a lot better than ps plus," the companies they support don't feel the pressure to offer better.