Games with Gold XB1

[quote user="SaltStorm III"] Someone who would prefer Sony stay in business.[/quote] And yet, you subscribe to a service that you yourself say is basically unhealthy and wrong.

 

[quote user="Pyramid Head15"]And yet, you subscribe to a service that you yourself say is basically unhealthy and wrong.[/quote]The mentality of people comparing PS+ to Games with Gold is wrong. The people who use it as a way to obtain games "for free" is
wrong. If the company has to give away revenue in order to build up its user base, it's doing something wrong. Sony had a lot of bad blood it had to redeem after the fiasco that was the PS3.

The way I use it (digital copy of a game I already own and will probably never play again) is perfectly fine.

Or did you miss the part where I said PS+ games are of little interest because I
own them already? I've already given the devs and pubs a cut. This includes PS-specific titles like Uncharted 3 and Infamous 2.

 

It's irrelevant if you bought them or not.That doesn't exonerate supporting a system that allows people to not let devs and pubs get their "cut."

 

I am sure the developers get their cut. Sony has to be paying them for giving games away for free right?

 

[quote user="Pyramid Head15"]It's irrelevant if you bought them or not.[/quote]It's completely relevant in our current day and age of buy once, play anywhere.

What he said:[quote user="x24hrs2livex"]I am sure the developers get their cut. Sony has to be paying them for giving games away for free right?[/quote]And as a follow-on, since Sony has to pay for the games and they don't get any revenue
from the gamer other than the paltry $50/yr, Sony's taking a bath on PS+ games.

 

Thats what I have always thought. I guess Sony is making some money, or the program wouldnt still exist...

 

People are paying Sony to use their service

Sony pays Devs/Pubs to put games on their service

Your original point is even stupider now. Not unless you got some actual proof Sony is taking major losses on the program.

 

Without the actual number of downloads per game, or the cost Sony pays to devs, neither one of you are right.

Sony very well could be putting out major cash to feature games, and the amount of downloads from subscribers might not make the practice a sound business move. But again without numbers we wont know

 

But here's the thing:

PEOPLE PAY SONY TO USETHEIR SERVICE

SONY PAYS DEVS AND PUBS TO PUT THEIR GAMES ON THE SERVICE

I'm helping two parties here by spending money on this service.

 

But if the amount of downloads from the people who subscribe to the service isnt equal to or greater than what Sony paid to the developers Sony loses money.

 

Maybe, but I find it hard to believe thats really the case.

Really, you're(not you specifically 24) telling people you're not supporting Sony despite PAYING ACTUAL MONEY to use their service. This in turns helps other companies indirectly.

The only people who really have a problem with this are corporate shills who think the Publishers and what not are entitled to everything once their product is released on the marketplace.

 

Copy and pasted from another thread, of similar origin

People, do we have to argue....... (probably)

Here is how it stands. GWG gives you free xbox 360 games, some over 6 years old and some newer, but not by much, many of these games you can pick up for as little as 50p + P&P. They are yours to keep forever. They may have been AAA titles, but really, can
people at least admit, they are a tad old. And most people will have owned a copy or still do, like crackdown, and Halo 3, Gears of War, Assassins Creed 2, etc, etc. They are yours to keep forever, but even if they were considered rentals like everyone here
terms the PS+ versions, would that be a bad thing. How many people here that had the afore-mentioned games have picked up assassins creed 2, or GOW, OR Crackdown before it became available on GWG, I know i certainly didn't. I was to busy playing newer releases.

How many of you here, that currently own an Xbox One and an Xbox 360, are not going to renew your membership, when it expires, because that pretty much removes most of the features of both consoles. Access to certain Apps, will be limited, there will be
no online multiplayer. So what would it matter if it was in the form of the PS+ way of doing things. If for whatever reason, you cannot afford to pay the subscription for a month, the games won't have dissapeared. They will still be there, when you renew.

Don't for one second believe Sony are paying top dollar for their PS+ games, sometime their games, co-inside with the publishers release of the next game in the series, or some DLC for that game. Or the game has finally hit rock bottom, like Assassins Creed
3, on PS+, released just in time for the release of Assassins Creed 4, nice bit of free advertising for the next game, jncluding any extra DLC, they might sell. Need for speed most wanted released on PS+, a few months before rivals was released, again with
boat loads of DLC available to buy. And the latest Tomb raider released on PS+ this month on PS3, uncanny timing, considering Tomb Raider DE was released on Next Gen, it's like try it on PS3, but it is so much better looking on next gen. Or they are 1st Party
games

There is a reason that certain games are released, i can bet you, Sony are making a deal from it, by either, forfeiting the license fee for each game downloaded under PS+ and allowing the PUB to take most of the money on DLC as well. Sony would hardly have
to pay anythjng, and PUBS, would get an older game out there to peolle who may have never played it, free advertising for their next game, and DLC available to all and sundry. Also, the fact that people can see other players, playing the game on twitch or
Ustream, might entice them to purchase their PS+ service, so they can get the game. Or people purchase the game without PS+ and pay full price. Either way it's a win/win for all included

While i agree that GWG, is a good idea, and one they nicked from Sony, and put their own spin on. For value for money, Microsoft is being out done.

I know i will get flamed like i always do. But just think about it logically. Think about what i typed. It would make sense. A company doing it that way, would hardly have to pay a penny, as the rewards for the Dev/Pub, maybe to good to pass up.

Also, too all those that don't like indie games, i refer you to this thread, not so long ago, where, a quite a few people, would like to see more indie games. I know that some people hate them. But think of all the classic indie games there have been. I
have played many of them over the years. And a some have been crap, and some extremely good

http://forums.xbox.com/xbox_forums/general_discussion/f/3817/t/1725151.aspx