How can any PS3/vita owner not be a PS+ member

Caporegime
Joined
27 Nov 2005
Posts
25,461
Location
Guernsey
I think it would be unbelievable for any PS3/vita gamer not to have a PS+ membership..
As for the cost of around a single game you get loads & loads of games to download and keep for free (For as long you stay a PS+ member :))

Are there really any PS3 gamers out that does not have PS+ ??



The only big problem I get with PS+ is not having enough PS3 harddrive & vita memorycard space......:D
 
Last edited:
I got PS+ when it first became good about last July I think when Infamous 2 went on there. I think the people who 'hate' PS+ are mainly people who wish they had joined then they should have done but would feel short-changed if they joined now because they would miss out on a massive amount of great content.
 
I've had it but usually let it lapse then join again at a later date, usually because when renewal comes around I also have a load of bills going out. Doesn't help doing it quarterly though. Having said that I got enough to renew now actually :)
 
I don't have it. I generally dislike my ps3 and find it pretty poor, I only useit for particularly games I cant get elsewhere so I would have no use for a subscription.
 
[TW]Fox;25105469 said:
I don't have it. I generally dislike my ps3 and find it pretty poor, I only useit for particularly games I cant get elsewhere so I would have no use for a subscription.

Out of interest what do you find poor about it? The controller is a sticky issue for some people, personally I find it nice to use, the triggers aren't fantastic though, the action of them feels spongy but apart from that I can't fault the DS3. The only other thing that bugs me is how slow the XMB is if you're in a game, it's painful.
 
Out of interest what do you find poor about it? The controller is a sticky issue for some people, personally I find it nice to use, the triggers aren't fantastic though, the action of them feels spongy but apart from that I can't fault the DS3. The only other thing that bugs me is how slow the XMB is if you're in a game, it's painful.

Only problem I have with the triggers are my fingers slip off them, keep meaning to get the extenders for them but never get round to it
 
Back when I used to have a PS3 PS+ was pants. Changed over to xbox 360 since then.
Just got myself a vita the other day and bang! straight away purchased ps+ for a year (check out cdkeys.com for £34.40 ;) ) - Been playing uncharted most of the night - yawwwwn, tired today :>

What with my pending PS4 purchase - I have a feeling I won't be buying games for a long time :) :)
 
Out of interest what do you find poor about it? The controller is a sticky issue for some people, personally I find it nice to use, the triggers aren't fantastic though, the action of them feels spongy but apart from that I can't fault the DS3. The only other thing that bugs me is how slow the XMB is if you're in a game, it's painful.

The graphics are pretty rubbish (Yes, I know it's a 6 year old console, I know they were good at the time), the controlpad is irritating, I just prefer PC gaming really - better graphics, better control options. I only keep a PS3 and an Xbox for must-have games which are not available on PC.

Which is why I'm not into subscription based addons for either of them, as they sit idle a lot of the time.
 
I think it would be unbelievable for any PS3/vita gamer not to have a PS+ membership..
As for the cost of around a single game you get loads & loads of games to download and keep for free (For as long you stay a PS+ member :))

Are there really any PS3 gamers out that does not have PS+ ??



The only big problem I get with PS+ is not having enough PS3 harddrive & vita memorycard space......:D

I only joined PS+ last week because I found a 12 month sub for £30 and need it in prep for when I get the PS4 on release. If it wasn't for that reason then I wouldn't of bothered.

PS+ is good but I still like to physically buy my games on the cheap and play them whenever I want. Not only play when I'm paying for a glorified rental service.
 
I only joined PS+ last week because I found a 12 month sub for £30 and need it in prep for when I get the PS4 on release. If it wasn't for that reason then I wouldn't of bothered.

PS+ is good but I still like to physically buy my games on the cheap and play them whenever I want. Not only play when I'm paying for a glorified rental service.

its definatly more than a glorified rental service though! it only takes 3 or 4 games to equal for cost of ps plus.

last xmas they had ps plus for £30 as a promo.. i hope they do that again this xmas...
 
its definatly more than a glorified rental service though! it only takes 3 or 4 games to equal for cost of ps plus.

last xmas they had ps plus for £30 as a promo.. i hope they do that again this xmas...

But what will happen when the PS3 is at that certain point Sony no longer offers free games? Thats the main reason why people join PS+, is it not? I doubt Sony will start offering free games on the PS4. You need PS+ to play online for the PS4 unlike the PS3.

Dont get me wrong, its great Sony offering free games but when it turns into Steam and you have a big long list of free game "one day, I will get round to playing them". The PS3 side of PSN may of been shut down and you are unable to access those free games again. Obviously not a problem if you have the physical disc.
 
But what will happen when the PS3 is at that certain point Sony no longer offers free games? Thats the main reason why people join PS+, is it not? I doubt Sony will start offering free games on the PS4. You need PS+ to play online for the PS4 unlike the PS3.

Dont get me wrong, its great Sony offering free games but when it turns into Steam and you have a big long list of free game "one day, I will get round to playing them". The PS3 side of PSN may of been shut down and you are unable to access those free games again. Obviously not a problem if you have the physical disc.

When are they going to shut down psn for the ps3? I doubt they ever will, same as Xbox Live for the 360 will never go. If people thought the PS2 had an amazing lifespan past it's generation they haven't seen anything yet. By the time that PS+ stops getting free PS3 games, there will be some for the PS4. That's if they ever stop getting them, in 4-5 years time even games like GTA V will probably be on there.
 
When are they going to shut down psn for the ps3? I doubt they ever will, same as Xbox Live for the 360 will never go. If people thought the PS2 had an amazing lifespan past it's generation they haven't seen anything yet. By the time that PS+ stops getting free PS3 games, there will be some for the PS4. That's if they ever stop getting them, in 4-5 years time even games like GTA V will probably be on there.

PSN for PS3 and Xbox Live 360 side wont be around for ever. Especially with Microsoft, take a look at the PC section if you are not aware with what's happening there http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18535618

Games for Windows Live will be discontinued on July 1, 2014 and people are kicking off because all those games which has been given way for free or they have brought off the Marketplace now run the risk of being unable to access the games after the service has been shut down. Some games will be still access through updates but some companies no longer around such as THQ, leaving their games dormant.

If you honestly believe Sony will give away free good games (such as AA titles) for the PS4 as part of PS+ like they do on the PS3 then you need to think carefully about their strategy.

Sony launched PS+ because they saw Microsoft charging for playing online and making shed loads of money out of subs especially when a new Fifa or COD is released. Sony saw this and wanted piece of the pie, so they launched PS+ with small features such as Cloud saving, scheduled updates etc. Minimal took it up as its was pants paying £40 a year for such little service. So the only way to get consumers interested into PS+ is to offer good free games. Then PS+ was brought to life and PSN was full of consumers playing online more than before.

Now, when Sony announced PS4 they said, you need to PS+ to play online apart from with free to play games. Not many, if any at all questioned "why do I need to pay to play online with the PS4 but I didn't with the PS3?" Because Sony have blinded consumers with the free games you get on PS3 with PS+ and it has over shadowed the requirement for paying the sub for playing PS4 online.

So why would Sony offer free games on the PS4 like they do for the PS3, when consumers have already brought into the system with PS+ from the previous generation?!?! Also why are the free games no longer accessible unless you sign backup to PS+. In a few years time when eveyone has moved onto PS4 from PS3, Sony wont be offering free games. Why would they, they dont have a reason to anymore as everyone is paying for PS+ on PS4 to online play only. Which is what Sony wanted from the start. Then Sony can announce in a few years time "Due to lack of players on the PS3 platform we are shutting down PSN for PS3 after XXXX date" And you are stuck technically paying the same for less on the PS+.

As for the Vita, again great offering free games but you need took a the ratio of, the amount of free games they offer, the size of the games and how much you are willing the fork out and buy their over priced memory cards to fit all those games on, compared to buying the physical game on the cheap. Yeah, its good we can download the games over again but I have 120mb virgin connection and it look over hour to download a 1.5GB game. Thats crazy compared to downloading a game in minutes of the same size to my tablet devices or phones.

Sony have a history of boasting about something good to get consumers attention then take it away later down the line. Look at what happened when Sony removed the Other OS option from the PS3 and the amount of fuss that kicked up. Sony's excuse....."Because of security reasons" What utter nonsense!! They used the OS Other option as an selling point against the 360.
 
Last edited:
Sony have already said that online needs to be paid for because they just cannot keep the service free on PS4 like they do (and will continue to do) for PS3 and Vita and meet the expectations of everyone and compete with Live etc... it cannot be done. It needs funds to carry on improving and provide a better service, they have said this.

Also PS+ on PS4 is getting free games from day one with Drive Club (admittedly a cut down version, but lets be fair it just came out... and the devs have confirmed with this version you can still get the platinum trophy so there's defo enough content in there) and later RESOGUN, Don't Starve, Outlast and Secret Ponchos (admittedly never heard of this but still, yay?). And that's just so far what is confirmed. At least that's what I assume you were getting at... Actually the monthly ps3 games has gone down from 3 to 2 to make way for ps4. But I still get access to games across all 3 platforms for the same fee, that's pretty awesome.

Also so what if I lose access to games if I no longer sub. I subbed for year for £40 (or less if you buy cheap cards or w/e promotions are going on) for a years worth of games that if bought individually are worth MUCH more than that, even if bought second hand. And apart from a few gems, how many games do you really go back and play after finishing?

And yeah Sony did boast a lot and take stuff away (although apart from Other OS what else did they do? One instance isn't a history of boasting imo)... but it came back to bite them. They may try again something as daft one day, but not any time soon that's for sure. They've improved a lot since then, they've learnt from their mistakes and have seriously turned things around for themselves imo. Could they remove the instant game collection one day? Maybe, but I don't think they will for a while yet.
 
I reackon sony will always offer free games on PS+ because it get 1000's of members to login to PSN every few weeks and look around at what else is available on PSN...;)

It just like supermarkets buy one get one free offers,,Those offers are only there to pull you into the shop to buy there other stuff..;);)
 
Last edited:
PSN for PS3 and Xbox Live 360 side wont be around for ever. Especially with Microsoft, take a look at the PC section if you are not aware with what's happening there http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18535618

Games for Windows Live will be discontinued on July 1, 2014 and people are kicking off because all those games which has been given way for free or they have brought off the Marketplace now run the risk of being unable to access the games after the service has been shut down. Some games will be still access through updates but some companies no longer around such as THQ, leaving their games dormant.

That's because Microsoft absolutely hate the PC platform, they have done for several years as they've lost a major foothold within the platform due to ignoring it and fully backing consoles. Now with companies like Valve making millions from Windows, and Microsoft having little to no chance of getting a piece of that pie, they are cutting ties and hoping the platform falls in on itself. Which it won't. The PS2 still has online play.

If you honestly believe Sony will give away free good games (such as AA titles) for the PS4 as part of PS+ like they do on the PS3 then you need to think carefully about their strategy.

Sony launched PS+ because they saw Microsoft charging for playing online and making shed loads of money out of subs especially when a new Fifa or COD is released. Sony saw this and wanted piece of the pie, so they launched PS+ with small features such as Cloud saving, scheduled updates etc. Minimal took it up as its was pants paying £40 a year for such little service. So the only way to get consumers interested into PS+ is to offer good free games. Then PS+ was brought to life and PSN was full of consumers playing online more than before.

Even when it first came out, PS+ offered more than XBL did. Sony never charged for online in the first place, if they had then Microsoft would be the ones trying to edge their way into the subscription market with similar methods.

Now, when Sony announced PS4 they said, you need to PS+ to play online apart from with free to play games. Not many, if any at all questioned "why do I need to pay to play online with the PS4 but I didn't with the PS3?" Because Sony have blinded consumers with the free games you get on PS3 with PS+ and it has over shadowed the requirement for paying the sub for playing PS4 online.

Why should anyone question it when Microsoft have been charging to play online since 2005? You still get more from a free account on the PS4 than you do the Xbox ONE. As somebody has stated, Sony requires users to pay for online next gen to improve their service, they've already offered it for free for 8 years, that's still one up on Microsoft.

So why would Sony offer free games on the PS4 like they do for the PS3, when consumers have already brought into the system with PS+ from the previous generation?!?! Also why are the free games no longer accessible unless you sign backup to PS+. In a few years time when eveyone has moved onto PS4 from PS3, Sony wont be offering free games. Why would they, they dont have a reason to anymore as everyone is paying for PS+ on PS4 to online play only. Which is what Sony wanted from the start. Then Sony can announce in a few years time "Due to lack of players on the PS3 platform we are shutting down PSN for PS3 after XXXX date" And you are stuck technically paying the same for less on the PS+.

It depends on your viewpoint. I don't think anyone is expecting AAA titles to appear on the PS4 PS+ within the first 6 months, instead it will be many of the hundreds of Indie titles the platform supports. PS3 PS+ is the same, the AAAs that appear on there have ran their natural course and it's a no brainer for both the developers and Sony to include them, same as it will be next gen.

Sony have a history of boasting about something good to get consumers attention then take it away later down the line. Look at what happened when Sony removed the Other OS option from the PS3 and the amount of fuss that kicked up. Sony's excuse....."Because of security reasons" What utter nonsense!! They used the OS Other option as an selling point against the 360.

What's 'OS other'? I don't know anything about that so cannot comment. But I can add what they did with backwards compatibility though. Sony removed that so they could sell Playstation 1+2 games on the PSN store. Granted Microsoft did it first, but still.
 
I bought a years worth when it was on offer for £30 in January, since then I've not bought a single Vita game in hard copy. I think its the best thing I've invested in for gaming on terms of value, hopefully the PS4 gets good treatment with it.

I've more or less gone fully digital with the Vita as a result, hopefully larger capacity memory cards are released at a cheaper price.
 
Didn't have a ps+ subscription until about July (aside from the odd free month) because I didn't feel it was worth it at all. However once they started actually putting worthwhile content on there like AAA titles, I can't really grumble.
 
Back
Top Bottom