WARNING: X1 Related, but does have "Sony" in the title. So if you're offended. ...

Does forbes.com ever not find ways to put down the Xbox brand, in some form or another?

Not sure I've ever read a positive write-up from them.

:)

 

14 games and no probs with storage.(Discussion)

[quote user="vG Ghostz"]

Yet IGN the sony lovers said they filled a xboxone hard drive. [Mod Removed]

[/quote]If they are Sony lovers I doubt they had an X1 to fill. I have a feeling you're just pointing fingers.

 

Launch Titles: More Sony Smoke & Mirrors

[quote user="Triple Digit777"]

LOL after seeing Sony Titles i am even more inclined tp get PS 4 ... Now that Sony is getting Minecraft there is no reason to want to get X1 .

[/quote]link

 

I skimmed it, but from what I gathered, it's good that Sony didn't pick up the offer, because people aren't smart enough to understand it, and it's a headache to support... GO GAMERS!

 

Its not like EA is a small itty bitty company ..

There are going to be a lot of games ,and if people get call of duty confused with being an EA title ,well thats on them ..I already paid for the plan and my kids are loving peggle 2!

A game i probably would not have even bothered getting ..

Can't wait to try out madden 15 and NHL 15,not to mention a ton of others before they hit the download page,or shelves (if your old school LOL)

 

That article is trash. Sony turned EA down simply because it directly competes with PS Now and makes their pricing scheme look horrendous. As a consumer you should always have an OPTION on what to do with your money and what services you use. Sony turning
down EA is ultimately a bad move for them, if other publishers hop on this train, not many people are going to use PS Now and these services would partner with Microsoft/Xbox. Which could ultimately lead to PS Now being a total failure.

Still baffles my mind that $4.99 for a 4 hour rental is good value but $4.99 a month to access 4 games isnt. Thats none of my business though.

 

EA has a solid game library. This is good in my opinion. If you dont want the service dont use it, if you do, use it.

 

Read the article....dude has very weak arguments. Basically, he says if other publishers do the same thing it would be "too confusing for gamers". I think having the option to purchase from the publisher(s) of your choice seems relatively simple, if they
all offered a similar program. I think hulu plus is a terrible value compared to netflix, should sony drop their app from the console because of this? More options = a good thing, and could lead to changes in pricing/structure of gaming.

 

I could see it becoming somewhat pricey if multiple publishers do this...All of a sudden you are paying 4.99 a month or 30 bucks a year to 3, 4, or 5 pubs. it will get expensive quick.

-

@24...As far as PS Now goes, the price point sucks. However, those prices are set by the publishers and not Sony. If they go with a subscription base it has a chance.

 

Have you seen the pricing structure for PS Now? How they have the nerve to call this poor value, I have no idea. Sony are charging $5 for people to rent a game for 4 hours, lol.

I paid £19.99 last night and now I have Battlefield 4, FIFA 14 and Madden NFL 25 which I can play for a full year (I already had Peggle 2) and who knows what other games will be added in that time. To me that's not good value. It's great value. If EA mess
it up then I just won't renew my subscription, but right now this is an awesome deal for people who want to play any 1 of the AAA titles included in the vault. It doesn't stop you from buying the games on disc. It doesn't stop you from renting the games elsewhere
or borrowing them from friends. It's completely optional. That Forbes article is nonsense.

As for other publishers jumping on board, firstly, I think only a couple of others are really in a position to do it. Ubisoft, for example. Secondly, if they do it - good! Since when is choice a bad thing? If you don't like it, just keep buying/renting/borrowing
games in the same way you've always done it, but if you're a fan of games from publisher X or publisher Y, you can pay a small annual fee and save yourself some money.

 

@Sigma.....refer to my previous post, Sony is not setting the prices, the pubs/devs are.

 

It doesn't matter who sets the prices. It's either poor value or it's not. There is absolutely no point in saying "it's poor value, but it's not Sony's fault" as that doesn't actually change the fact that it's poor value. Are the games where Sony is the
publisher/developer cheaper on PS Now? I'm guessing the answer to that is "no".

 

Maybe sony should tell those pub/devs to shoveit like they did EA then ..

That would make sense ,,and not saying that the ea deal is not "a good value"

 

[quote user="SigmaTheDJ"]Have you seen the pricing structure for PS Now? How they have the nerve to call this poor value, I have no idea. Sony are charging $5 for people to rent a game for 4 hours, lol.[/quote]

You can't be serious?

You know if they didn't have PS Now they'd be all over it. Besides people don't have to buy it. They can pay full price for games if they want.

 

@brandi thats what I dont get about Sony. Who are they to determine what I think a good value is? If EA Access was on PS and MS had made this statement I can guarantee the internet would meltdown over this. Yet again though Sony can do no wrong.