OMG THE PS4

WhatDoesThePendantDo? wrote:The retardness...

http://windowsitpro.com/paul-thurrotts-wininfo/microsoft-vs-sony-dueling-e3-presentations

The fanboy comments at the bottom are funny. Talking about how the xbone will be the media hub while the PS4 will have to wait for games releases to be used... um... I've been using my PS3 as a media hub for 5 years and the reason I'm not upgrading right away is because neither offer me anything more than what the PS3 currently offers until there are great games to go along w/ it.

Fanboys...

Sentiel wrote:Wait wait wait.
IF, big friggin' IF that PS+ will retain the qualities of the current one, it's really worth paying.
I got PS+ for a year and got already so many free games it covered the fee for + two times already and it still has 6 months before expiring.

That's what I call good service.

For me the problem is not being given a choice. That was a big part of the reason I preferred Playstation in the first place. It was part of the reason for a lot of other people too, or maybe I'm just fabricating all my memories of console flame wars when PS fans constantly threw that fact around. It may be a service that's totally worth paying for, but its also the start down a road I'm not happy about being forced to go down. Honestly I think its the fault of the consumer. At least at this point. We're letting them get away with it. If they announced it and the majority of their fan base decided it wasn't alright that they were doing that, and decided not to support their products because of it, they would have had no choice, but we let them get away with their justification. I'm not going to.

I was just talking to my roommate about it, who just the other day was saying how unhappy he would be if they started charging for their online service, and now is defending it and explaining how its so much better than what Microsoft is doing. I don't think that makes it alright. It says to me that they saw what Microsoft was getting away with and said hey well if they're doing that then we can do this, be dcks, and still be considered the better option. Lesser dck is still a dck.

Sony doesn’t offer the same range of amazing media services that Microsoft does, and it certainly offers no TV integration capabilities, as is possible with the Xbox One. These markets are much bigger than the market for console video game players. thats a quote from the link pendant posted. but prior to that they quoted talking about how the hardcore GAMERS only buy a xbox, not a playstation....so hardcore gamers buy a console for its tv options...right....

kingdom hearts 3...make a special edition KH ps4 and they can charge whatever they want. that fanbase is crazy. if thats ps4 exclusive....xbox is losing another foot.

ive been pro sony forever. microsoft is and always will be a shady company. very not customer friendly. friends turn in a xbox with a red eye, get it back 3 weeks later, if they are lucky. i sent my ps3 in (my fault, got unplugged while saving a game. corrupt HDD ensued) i got my ps3 back in barely a week.

why anyone ever buys a xbox is beyond me...a few exclusives, gears is nice...halo is kinda childs dream of coolness and is over populated with...doucheness that ruined it.

rant post summerized. im glad sony finally creamed xbox. there is no debate. if you want halo pay $500. if you want a real console for games, by a ps4.

(does suck that you need plus to be online, but if you have a playstation you should have plus anyway. it pays for itself in free games a dozen times over. not to mention sales.)

but i 100% agree with plastic above me. im not happy sony is forcing the issue. but i defend it mildy that people wont regret it. what did being gold live member get you? achievements...and online play? its still a underhanded move, and i wish they'd take it back. how will i troll players with my alternate accounts now?. i have a few amusing names that im not buying ps plus just to troll with. oh well.

Paying for Online ? lolnope .

I used to like Kingdom Hearts, it was my guilty pleasure but now the Story has become a clusterf*ck that i can't get into anymore .

I'm not buying it .

Yeah, not a huge fan of the pay to play online, but really... they can get away w/ it at this point given that the box is also pay to play, but has all those other features nobody wants.

As for the TV integration... I understand what they are trying to do by broadening the base of their customers... but how broad is the marketplace for customers that are buying hardware outside of their cable/dish deals? How many customers are doing the Hulu only thing that they think will splurge $500 for a new piece of hardware? Seems like an awfully small market unless they can integrate it with every cable/dish company.

I'm a little bummed that Sony is forcing the pay to play online issue actually. I'm a huge fan of Plus and essentially a Sony pitchman for it to be honest but mandatory stinks a good deal. For me personally it's a non issue. I used to balk at subscription anything related to video games. Never played a subscription MMORP (except EverQuest on a friend's account), never even used a free Xbox Gold Weekend. The only reason I bought Plus is because of my limited game cash. I was only able to buy a few new games a year (if that) so plus, at the cost of less than one game has kept me very busy. The value has been there to make me wanna continue it as long as I can but I still feel it was a little sneaky of Sony to toss that little fact in there that casually.

Guys i just got a tweet saying Sony will allow third Parties to implement DRM if they want to HELP. R

"@Polygon: PlayStation 4 third-party publishers can dictate their own DRM terms, Tretton says http://t.co/CDqai0V2lL"

skarekrow13 wrote:The value has been there to make me wanna continue it as long as I can but I still feel it was a little sneaky of Sony to toss that little fact in there that casually.

The video where they were talking about it at E3 was ridiculous. He's like going through the list of things the new PS+ will do, and at the end was like "cough online multiplayer cough."

I love the PS4 so far, but the subscription thing gives me mixed feelings. On one hand, PS+ is awesome. On the other, online will be more limited...

For me it's basically saying if I want to continue being a Sony customer I need to pay another monthly bill. I make enough money to be relatively financially independent, but I'm still not very financially secure. I already have a monthly internet bill, a monthly Netflix bill, a monthly Hulu Plus bill (because both of those combined is still cheaper than cable), a monthly power bill, a monthly gas bill, a monthly garbage removal bill, and property taxes. I don't need another monthly bill. In the midst of all of that video games are supposed to be where I go to relax and forget that I have responsibilities for awhile. Not add another one to them whether its only $5 or not.

Now i'm even more inclined to drop gaming as a whole .

I just want a hunk of plastic where i an put smaller hunks of plastic things in and play right away .

Really now Sony, Microsoft don't try to make a Computer we already have Computers, they're called Computers .

"@JoinXboxShun: OK, re. earlier Sony DRM tweet. Most people seem to agree this is just relating online passes, not system-level DRM http://t.co/21b6NEspvl"

Maybe this is true?

PlasticandRage wrote:

Sentiel wrote:Wait wait wait.
IF, big friggin' IF that PS+ will retain the qualities of the current one, it's really worth paying.
I got PS+ for a year and got already so many free games it covered the fee for + two times already and it still has 6 months before expiring.

That's what I call good service.

For me the problem is not being given a choice. That was a big part of the reason I preferred Playstation in the first place. It was part of the reason for a lot of other people too, or maybe I'm just fabricating all my memories of console flame wars when PS fans constantly threw that fact around. It may be a service that's totally worth paying for, but its also the start down a road I'm not happy about being forced to go down. Honestly I think its the fault of the consumer. At least at this point. We're letting them get away with it. If they announced it and the majority of their fan base decided it wasn't alright that they were doing that, and decided not to support their products because of it, they would have had no choice, but we let them get away with their justification. I'm not going to.

I was just talking to my roommate about it, who just the other day was saying how unhappy he would be if they started charging for their online service, and now is defending it and explaining how its so much better than what Microsoft is doing. I don't think that makes it alright. It says to me that they saw what Microsoft was getting away with and said hey well if they're doing that then we can do this, be dcks, and still be considered the better option. Lesser dck is still a dck.

I know and agree. I only tried to brighten up the dark news a bit.
I'm not happy about it either.

Kiva the wanderer wrote:"@JoinXboxShun: OK, re. earlier Sony DRM tweet. Most people seem to agree this is just relating online passes, not system-level DRM http://t.co/21b6NEspvl"

Maybe this is true?

Seems fine to me. This just means they aren't going to force publishers/developers not to use DRM. It's basically the same way it is now.

Serious_Much wrote:You have to get PSN plus to play online?

RIP online for serious

Might be very cheap, but my father will never agree on paying specially since I'll be going to college

So thats RIP online for Carphil, sadly.

Kiva the wanderer wrote:"@JoinXboxShun: OK, re. earlier Sony DRM tweet. Most people seem to agree this is just relating online passes, not system-level DRM http://t.co/21b6NEspvl"

Maybe this is true?

Official statement from Sony has further clarified the matter.

This situation is complex, but the outcome is thought to be:

• Any PS4 game disc can be rented, resold, offered to friends (etc) with no checks or restrictions.
  
• The online (multiplayer) component of third-party games could be restricted to second-users (with a paid online pass required to unlock).
  
• However, the online component of third-party games may not be locked - the decision is down to the publisher.
  
• When it comes to first-party games, there will be no online restrictions.
  
• Traditional DRM policy (no lending) applies to digitally downloaded games, as usual.
  

In short, this is no different to what the PS3 does now, except we have to have a PS+ subscription to play online.

Oh thank God

From what i understood we need to pay 5 bucks monthly to play Online no matter what yes ?

PS4 has my money, when I decide to pay. I'm not really a big fan of
paying for online gameplay to be honest but with the new info along with
the perks of plus I might just pay for online depending on how much it
costs a month.

Also I believe in that article Pendant linked
that Xbox One sales will also rely on the value of the Kinect. That
doesn't sound like a good idea to me, since whenever I think of the
Kinect this is what I'm reminded of.

Plus is currently $50 for a year. So a little less than Gold. I hope they retain that price point and the same amount of perks

i hate ps plus pretty much you have to buy ps plus to play online f that crap ill barely play online on ps4 even though i love competitive and coop such a shame

Europe gets screwed on the pricing as usual. I'll wait about a year to get it. I'm only interested in FF XV and Kingdom of Hearts III anyway.

I'm surprised at the backlash. Do I want free online? Of course I do, but I don't think a $5 dollar monthly fee is pulling teeth.

Keep in mind I am coming at this from the perspective of someone who already pays for Gold so I might see it a little differently than you guys. I'm not saying anyone is right or wrong.

i don't mind the ps+ thing, come on guys you get so many games for free, you actually only get ps+ and no buy another game ever.