It's a pity Sony demands a subscription for playing online. That was the only negative that was announced, and it's a big negative. I had easily picked a PS4 up sooner or later if it had free online multiplayer
Really? I mean REALLY????
God...
I kinda agree with him, PS3's free online play was a big plus over the 360. I was hoping it would remain free but understand a modest fee for proper online hosting is probably required today. It certainly was a negative however one that I can look past considering the rest of the 'positives'. I can understand how those who may be on a significantly tight budget would view this as a concern.
I'm not sure it is proper, as you attempt, to trivialize, marginalize, or outright ridicule ones opinion as such.
don't worry dude, you are going to see pretty much all the sony fanboys changing their tune about not caring about paying to play online on ps4 since they have no other option, and they can no longer use it in their fanboy arguments about why sony owned xbox360. i've seen it from numerous people since last night's announcement, from people who used to claim they would never pay to play online games and that ps3 owned 360 due to that fact.
I kinda agree with him, PS3's free online play was a big plus over the 360. I was hoping it would remain free but understand a modest fee for proper online hosting is probably required today. It certainly was a negative however one that I can look past considering the rest of the 'positives'. I can understand how those who may be on a significantly tight budget would view this as a concern.
I'm not sure it is proper, as you attempt, to trivialize, marginalize, or outright ridicule ones opinion as such.
don't worry dude, you are going to see pretty much all the sony fanboys changing their tune about not caring about paying to play online on ps4 since they have no other option, and they can no longer use it in their fanboy arguments about why sony owned xbox360. i've seen it from numerous people since last night's announcement, from people who used to claim they would never pay to play online games and that ps3 owned 360 due to that fact.
No dude...it's not paying to play online. It's paying to have access to subscriptions I already pay for (Netflix, hulu etc).
DO you really believe that nonsense you're saying?
If you are on so tight a budget that less than $5 per month is too expendive, you have absolutely no business even looking at a new game console in the first place.
lol i never even said i was talking about you. your panties must be in a bunch again.
i said the ps3 fanboys. unless you are putting yourself in the ps3 fanboy camp...
If you are on so tight a budget that less than $5 per month is too expendive, you have absolutely no business even looking at a new game console in the first place.
You have no right to make this claim, you must be a ignorant or spoiled child. You are coming off as a arrogant ass. I am by no means complaining about it, but at least I have the mental fortitude to understand others concerns. Your opinion on the matter means nothing.
I'm talking in general too. The #1 complaint for those who did complain on here about XBL Gold wasn't that you had to pay just to go into MP games. It was that if you just wanted to use video streaming like PS3 owners can, you were paywalled.
My second point stands. I don't care what console you're looking at, if you cannot pay $5/month to do MP with it because you are on too tight a budget, you should not even consider buying a new console.
that was definitely not the #1 complaint here. it was that you had to pay on xbl for playing games online, something that you paid for when you bought the game, and that you didn't have to do that on ps3. i'm not digging up threads to show you because i know they are there since i took part in many of them and got tired of saying the same shit over and over and over about how xbl is obviously worth it if there are millions of members using it and the online games like cod and bf had more online players on 360 than ps3.
as far as the 2nd point i don't really care about your point. it's not up to you to decide other people's gaming budgets and what their principles are.
You have no right to make this claim, you must be a ignorant or spoiled child. You are coming off as a arrogant ass. I am by no means complaining about it, but at least I have the mental fortitude to understand others concerns. Your opinion on the matter means nothing.
The concerns that you can afford to buy a $400 system, but not spend $50 for a yearly subscription is a bit suspect.
People who buy a Lambo don't cry because they can't afford the maintenance. They cry because they hate spending money, which is why they have so much.
No but I know for a fact that if $5 per month is too steep I wouldn't be on here at all. I'd have bigger worries.
there is a difference between not wanting to spend $5 to pay online and not being able to afford to do so. seems to be a really hard concept for you to grasp.
I've always made both complaints about Xbox Live Gold -- paying for multiplayer (free on PC + PS3) and paying for Netflix and Amazon "just because".
So I am annoyed that Sony took a big step towards XBLG paywalling, even if they only went half as far.
They still win though, for only being half as evil, and at least they give you a pile of free games with PSN+. MS copied that, but only until November.