Jump to content
IGNORED

PlayStation 4 Console Thread

mushashi

By mushashi
in Discussion

 Share

Recommended Posts

DocG

DocG

Posted
Posted

Physical side effects of the PS4 news:

  1. I really want a Vita.
  2. I might just stop buying 360 games and see this generation out on the PS3.
  3. I'm debating moving my PS4 pre-order from Amazon to a bricks&mortar place that'll do a midnight opening.
  4. Physical arousal.
2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
RubberJohnny

RubberJohnny

Posted
Posted

Maybe I'm missing something, but didn't the backlash against 360 come from the poor value of paid online and Kinect - and now even the best console has both those? I'm not seeing the victory here, it seems like the stuff that makes everyone angry this gen has become the standard next gen - and everyone is celebrating?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MojoChin

MojoChin

Posted
Posted

I haven't watched the conference, will do later, but I've saw absolutely nothing about games, bar "no Last Guardian" (surprise). There were games at this no DRM, no online mandatory, no camera, sharing games, 349 console weren't there?

1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
cassidy

cassidy

Posted
Posted

Well considering I was expecting £400 I'm well happy with the whole news. So thought I'd stick Killzone and Destiny on the preorder list. Love the fact me and my son can just use the same copy of the game. Well played Sony.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RubberJohnny

RubberJohnny

Posted
Posted

Bundled != Mandatory. And it isn't bundled anyway.

Sure, but Kinect wasn't either, and still generated a huge amount of backlash.

It just seems everyone's really happy to jump out of the frying pan and into the fire here. Suddenly everyone is excusing paid online, despite that being complained about for the last 18 months?

Is it just a general fickleness, or what?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JPickford

JPickford

Posted
Posted

Sure, but Kinect wasn't either, and still generated a huge amount of backlash.

You're talking about the original Kinect? The backlash was down to it being useless for games and nobody wanting it.

With Xbox ONE it's forced upon us.

How you can paint this as some sort of fickle reaction I don't know. Speaking personally my opinion hasn't changed. Kinect was never darkening my door.

I (stupidly) paid for Gold for reasons other than online. I cancelled it the other day due to the DRM & Kinect stuff. I subscribe to PSN+ for reasons other than online.

2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
RubberJohnny

RubberJohnny

Posted
Posted

ou're talking about the original Kinect? The backlash was down to it being useless for games and nobody wanting it.

With Xbox ONE it's forced upon us.

Yeah, I'm talking about the current 360, the existence of it there sparked this whole backlash off (so people said), so it's weird to see a collective shrug about the same thing on PS4.

Same with complaints about 360 Live and a shrug for mandatory PS+ for online.

People were saying this stuff "shows contempt for the consumer", "shows their downfall in not catering to the hardcore", "taken over by the fucking suits" and a million other comments, and those are now absent.

They're right back in the bad situation they complained so much about, just having traded platforms.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SozzlyJoe

SozzlyJoe

Posted
Posted

Yeah, I'm talking about the current 360, the existence of it there sparked this whole backlash off (so people said), so it's weird to see a collective shrug about the same thing on PS4.

Same with complaints about 360 Live and a shrug for mandatory PS+ for online.

There is a shrug as

1) we have all been thoroughly primed up for paid online for years by MS.

2) PS+ is worth subscribing to in its own right

Sure it sucks. But if that is the price we have to pay for the rest of it, it's a bitter pill but one I can just about swallow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stingo

Stingo

Posted
Posted

mandatory PS+ doesn't seem definitive yet. From the trailers I've seen, it implies PS+ (like fe in DriveClub) provides for a _more_ deeper/immersive online experience. Doesn't seem like it's a requirement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Spacehost

Spacehost

Posted
Posted

mandatory PS+ doesn't seem definitive yet. From the trailers I've seen, it implies PS+ (like fe in DriveClub) provides for a _more_ deeper/immersive online experience. Doesn't seem like it's a requirement.

There's a disclaimer at the bottom of Sony's game lending video that says online multiplayer requires PS+.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Trigg

Trigg

Posted
Posted

Yeah, I'm talking about the current 360, the existence of it there sparked this whole backlash off (so people said), so it's weird to see a collective shrug about the same thing on PS4.

Same with complaints about 360 Live and a shrug for mandatory PS+ for online.

I can explain why I have problems with LIVE and Kinect on the Xbox 360 and why the PSN+ change doesn't worry me.

Firstly, Kinect. It annoyed me that it seemed to be everywhere, trying to push it in our faces, a lot of the time in really novel and pointless fashions. It felt like they were just adding just for the sake of it. I guess it was the over marketing of a product that I had no interest in and would likely never have interest in. It was irrational at times, granted.

LIVE is a different one. I was a Gold subscriber up until a couple of years ago when I started PC gaming again. I didn't need a live sub anymore but by not getting a live sub I was unable to use the media service on the 360. Again wasn't much of a problem as I had other means to use the majority of them either on the PC or PS3. The one thing that really pissed me off was the NBA game time app was behind the Gold paywall. This is after paying £150 for the season already to find that I'd have to pay more on top for Gold.

Now it seems that PSN+ is purely for online gaming, none of the media apps will be behind that paywall and that just seems fairer to me. Paying will hopefully mean the servers for online are better for the people that use them but will also allow people who just want to watch iPlayer or Netflix can do so.

That's why I'm not concerned with PSN+ needed for online gaming.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
pauc

pauc

Posted
Posted

PS+ isn't mandatory if you want to play single player, local multiplayer and use the media functions. You'll still be able to use the web browser and get system updates and those things.

PS+ is required if you want to play games online, but it still gives you "free" shiny stuff as it does in it's current guise for the PS3.

I expect the PS+ PS4 content will be just a single game a refresh early on, but once the catalogue of games ramps up it's be just like the PS3 offering to which is really good.

I think it's a bit of a negative step, but overall with the other parts of PS+ it's feels worth it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.

  I accept