Like it or not, the PlayStation 3 and Vita are nearing the end of their lives. That's not to say that either system is irrelevant – this author's been playing the addictive Steamworld Heist on the latter lately – but they're not in their heyday anymore. Sony knows this: it's ceased talking about the PS3 almost entirely, and while it continues to cultivate a small but enthusiastic niche on the Vita, it recognises that the PlayStation 4 is the way forward for its business.
Why, then, does it persist on serving up scraps for both systems with PlayStation Plus while the PlayStation 4 fanbase grows increasingly disgruntled? The subscription service has surged to 20 million members, and that's down to it being borderline mandatory on the manufacturer's new-gen console. It's not like the old days anymore, where the Instant Game Collection was the only attraction – no one is signed up solely for the PS3 and Vita. And if you are, then you should cancel, because you're getting a bad deal.
A look back at some of the freebies on the aforementioned platforms reveals just how badly Sony is phoning things in. Sure, the addition of Yakuza 5 in August is a standout, but Super Stardust HD and The Last Guy – two great but ancient games – didn't exactly get pulses racing in March, did they? Nor should they – the former first deployed all the way back in 2007. As for LocoRoco Cocoreccho! in May – well, how many people realise that that's essentially a screensaver?
It's barely been better on the Vita either, with PlayStation Portable games becoming commonplace now that the company's exhausted all of the native Vita releases. And who even bothered to download the likes of Shutshimi and A Virus Named Tom in April – we genuinely couldn't even tell you what type of game the latter is. The fact of the matter is that the quality of the goodies on these consoles has nosedived hard, the odd exception aside.
Meanwhile, there are millions upon millions of subscribers who only care about the PS4 – and you don't need to be a genius to see that most people are unhappy. Of course pleasing everyone will always be impossible, and there's no guarantee that ditching PS3 and Vita support will free up the necessary resources to improve the new-gen offerings – but it's an idea worth exploring. After all, there is time and money spent fulfilling the quota on old consoles which would surely be better invested elsewhere.
We've heard it mooted that Sony could redirect those resources towards PlayStation VR, but we're not convinced that that would be a popular choice either. What's apparent, though, is that the existing model needs to change. PlayStation Plus has, in many ways, been a victim of its own success – the bloat in members has clearly made it increasingly difficult for the platform holder to convince big publishers to get on board – but the Japanese giant pioneered this innovative initiative, and it now needs to forge a new direction for the service.
It could start, perhaps, by leaving the old behind.
Do you think that Sony should consider dropping PlayStation Plus support on PS3 and Vita? Are you still subscribed specifically for those systems? What could the platform holder possibly do to improve the perception of its subscription service these days? Be kind in the comments section below.
Should Sony drop PlayStation Plus support on PS3, Vita? (143 votes)
- Yes, it’s definitely time to move on now
- Meh, who gives a crap?
- No, it should support the legacy systems
Please login to vote in this poll.
Comments 78
Really doesn't matter. The sheer number of PS+ users on PS4 means that the cost of giving away good games is not economically viable, regardless of last gen support (which arguably costs comparatively orders of magnitude less)
I don't give a flying rat's ass about PS Plus for the PS3/Vita, but I do fear the day when Sony will say that the PSN no longer works for the PS3, effectively crippling any online purchase/DLC/patch/update and basically locks my PS3 into just playing non-patched versions of a crapload of games I've purchased for it. I don't know if it will ever happen, but what's to stop Sony from saying "You know what? It's been 20 years, no more space in our servers for any kind of PS3 game/program/update. Move on to the PS7 folks."
@Mega-Gazz Agreed. Surely those freed up resources (no matter how marginal) could make a difference, though?
Just glancing at the Facebook comments seems to indicate there are still quite a few subscribers on PS3 and Vita who want the service to continue on the systems. Personally I'd rather they integrated game keys for PS Now into the service to enable a kind of backward compatibility, but then PS Now isn't available to everyone.
I guess things should probably be kept as they are for now. But please, please, no more recycled games that have already been given away on the service! (Sidenote: even more disappointing than Retro/Grade's reinclusion on the service, for me, is Sony totally turning a blind eye to all the posts and complaints that pointed this out and just pretending they don't exist. Making a business decision is one thing but not addressing the complaints of paying subscribers is pretty disgusting.)
I voted scrap it for legacy machines. Totally personal reason of i ditched the ps3 and vita a long time ago to go current gen at launch. Of course there is the crossover period but sony should change things. Maybe not ditch it fully to keep others happy, how about drop the offering to one game for those systems?
@get2sammyb Speaking of PS+, there is a sale on Newegg.com (US online retailer) for 1 year for $37.99 w/ code EMCELHE39
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIA24G15W2120&cm_re=PS%2b--79-260-003--Product
It's only good for about 18 hours if you feel like running an add for Newegg.
Also on sale on PS4 w/ similar codes
Witcher 3 $25 EMCELHE29
Far Cry Primal $25 EMCELHE32
DQH $15 EMCELHE28
Fallout 4 $20 EMCELHE35
AC Syndicate $17 EMCELHE33
They are about 2/3 down the page.
http://promotions.newegg.com/NEemail/July-0-2016/WExpress_30/index-landing.html?utm_medium=Email&utm_source=EXPRESS073016&cm_mmc=EMC-EXPRESS073016--EMC-073016-Index--Header-_-ClickHere&et_cid=28065&et_rid=235394&et_p1=&email64=cmplanJAb3B0aW11bS5uZXQ=
Edit, OK, so I can't get any of my links to work, sorry, I tried.
@get2sammyb Big question - if you comepltley scrap PS+ on PS3 (and I guess on Vita, don't follow it all that well), what do you do w/ all those games all those gamers are still playing that they've gotten over the past 5 years? PS3 has had some great games over the years, not recently, but there were some, surley people are still playing a few of them.
Do you automatically give all those games to all those gamers free forever on Vita and PS3, or do you tell them, sorry, you can't play them anymore unless you buy them? I don't think you can address this bigger question until you address that issue, and I read the article and you didn't mention it at all.
@KratosMD That would be acceptable. Or at least, give permission to the public to upload said updates to their websites. But still, automatically locking further access to digital games I've paid for will be catastrophic. I mean, there are people who have spent hundreds, if not thousands of dollars and euro in digital games. They should have access to them as long as Sony still stands as a company.
Keep it as it is. Stopping supporting the other systems does not mean you will be getting any better games for PS4 it just means everyone is getting less.If they did stop the games for PS3 would they be stopping the ps plus service all together for that system? Its not just about games its also the backup online for games.By not providing the games it makes the PS Plus poor value. I subscribe on PS4 for the service but think it provides best value for the games it has given me on the PS3.
It wouldn't make a difference to the stuff we're getting for PS4. What might be workable with so many subscribers is to offer a full AAA game but for only a limited period (say, a week) after which if you want to continue playing you buy at a heavily discounted (but more than 5.99) price alongside a new Indie title.
Or, to avoid one developer getting spanked by 20 million subscribers offer any full PS4 title from say 6 months ago and back for the 5.99 and let the user decide. That'd limit the exposure to the devs.
Yes, it's time to drop the PS Plus support for the PS3 and Vita, in the EU and NA....
However, I don't know if Japan has an equal to PS Plus? (I don't think they do)........but if that's the case, you may want to keep that going for a bit longer, at least another year or two.......the PS3 seems to be almost dead in Japan (but still healthier than in the west), and the Vita is still going rather steady.
Stop with the firmware updates on the Vita as well, so I can hack the hell out of it, lol.
I really don't download any of the Vita/ PS3 games, except for the occasional good game. While I love my Vita and PS3, it's time for Sony to pull out and redirect those resources.
@sub12 Japan does have a similar PS+ system has we do in NA and EU. Though they do get to watch episodes of anime for free as well monthly with PS+ which is pretty cool.
I never bothered with PS Plus while I had my PS3 and Vita - only subscribing to it since getting a PS4. I still have both my PS3 and Vita and I have certainly taken advantage of the PS Plus discounts and some of the free monthly games.
I'm personally not that bothered if PS Plus support is dropped for PS3 and Vita - my concern echoes others on this comment thread in Sony dropping network support for these consoles - I have over 20 games downloaded from PSN on my Vita and over 50 games downloaded from PSN on my PS3 HDD (I put a 1TB in it 3 years ago). To lose access to these games after years of supporting PS3 and Vita would be a kick in the teeth...
This idea of dropping psplus support on legacy systems has been branded around for ages now.
What I want to know is this;
We've never had an article on how Sony pays / finds / contracts the ps plus games so how the hell do you know how much they are paying for each game on each system?
Why does everyone believe Sony pays on a per download basis? If I was Sony holding most of the cards there is zero chance I would operate in this manner.
Why do you believe the saved money would go towards supposedly better games? Sony is a business who pay directors, share holders, partner and subsidiary companies. Why would they suddenly offer 4/5/6 ps4 games when they dont have to?
So, do we just assume that dropping PS Plus free games for PS3 and Vita will equate to Sony just giving us 6 PS4 games per month?
I think it's a 'careful what you wish for' scenario. It's all well and good us asking for more PS4 games, but will they end up being the indies that people seem to rip on so much every month? I mean, really...what model do people want to see?
@themcnoisy Yeah... good points. I was tying a similar post (just below) as you were. I'm genuinely curious about what REASONABLE offerings Sony should undertake, should they actually drop support for PS3 and Vita.
As I said previously that nobody seems to mention is what happens to all the Plus games on PS3 and Vita if the service was taken off. Are they all of a sudden going to be freely available even to those that might have subscribed to the service for a brief time? I doubt publishers would be happy with that arrangement. Or do we lose them for good, if that were to happen me and I would guess many others would be angered at losing games on their platforms because forum users from another platform think games like Tricky Towers is somehow not worthy enough, we had this problem when high quality games like Velocity 2X was on the service yet people still moaned cos "it's retro sidescroller BS".
Sony then started giving people the choice of what games they wanted but still complained, at the end of the day people don't know what they want.
Also if they did drop PS3 and Vita, people will immediately think they will be getting 6 games now which is highly unreasonable.
And let's face it most of the criticism aimed at the service stems from being anti indie because they prefer to play games with higher budgets and more fancier graphics because games by small teams should be cheap yet should not be on Plus, which makes no sense at all. It's the same people who complained that No Man's Sky shouldn't be full priced yet they were happy to pay the same price for AAA games that are unfinished, broken, heavily DLC based or all three. I just hope Sony don't cave in to the kind of people that just look for the scandal of the week story just so they can vent their anger.
Yes it's time to move on, ps4 and ps vr is the future, not ps3 or ps vita.
Absolutely not!!! I love my Vita freebies and with a whole back catalogue of PSP games available, u should be guaranteed top (85%+) games every month! Gave my PS3 to my niece and she love the freebies too. . . What would Sony REPLACE them with??? Highly unlikely you'll be getting SIX PS4 games every month!!
Corporate savings is never passed on to us so I say keep em'.
Ok so if Sony cannot get 2 good PS4 games per month, how will they find 6? Why keep discriminating Vita as a last gen system?
I have Plus first for the online and then for the sales. "Free" games could stop and it would be the same to me. Sony should work in getting all the PS3 downloadable games on PS4 and not Now, as well as PS1 games.
Drop PS+ for PS3/Vita, but for goodness sake help support the Vita! At least in some small measure. Pay to port a few top-rated indies or something. Idk. Or work on getting PS2 running on the system and sell those as virtual console. Idk, it might be possible.
@sinalefa
They've been needing to put PSone games on PS4 for years, but I don't think they will because they've also cornered themselves with crossbuy.
If they take time to port to PS4, tens of millions of gamers will expect them free, since they purchased them on PS3 or Vita.
And Sony doesn't want to put in all that work for nothing, so, they just ignore them and bring PS2 games- something they know they can actually charge everyone for. It's lame, and one of the consequences to crossbuy between 2 systems. I'd rather buy them a second time and have them, then not have them at all on PS4.
I don't understand why scrapping PS+ games for PS3/Vita would mean the end of patches for the games. Surely patches should be continued whatever. It doesn't take much space on Sony's servers to store them and won't make a huge dent on performance. Surely the biggest danger to patches is when the game makers no longer bother to patch them.
With the games surely numbers will decide. I only use my PS3 to play Dark Souls and haven't used my Vita for ages. And that will soon be the same across all users. There will come a point where the demand isn't worth it.
Stopping ps+ games on other systems doesn't guarantee we will get games everyone wants on ps4 every month. Everyone wants different things, you'll never please everyone.
I don't get the continued crusade to cut down the content we get on PS+. I think if you want to write an article covering the service it would be better to ask why there is a fee for online gaming at all than why we should indicate we want less content from that fee.
I see all those 'free' Vita games as the best reason to get that console, 2+ free games a month stored up since you started plus means anyone who picks up a Vita has a potentially huge catalogue of games. Games like Yakuza give me a reason to boot up my PS3, picking out a few older or worse games offered on PS3 is disingenuous since there has been a higher quality of PS3 game offered than PS4, especially earlier on in the year.
This article exists due to the (perceived) poor offerings for PS4, to expect them to improve by removing games from other systems seems shortsighted. Given the heavy focus on remasters this gen it shows there is still call for older games so it shouldn't be a surprise if these games get downloaded more than we might expect. I can see no reason to vote to remove the two systems unless you believe you will get something better and there is very little chance of that.
I could not vote, because, yes for PS3, but not yet for VITA.
PS3 has a direct successor and it's huge, better in almost everyway. Vita on the other hand don't have (and probably will not) a successor, so they should support for at least 1 more year.
I personally think Sony should move on from the PS3/Vita now if they cannot offer a better quality of games to PS4 owners - certainly where the PS+ IGC are concerned - and no that doesn't mean offering 6 PS4 games instead. I still own my PS3 although I don't own a Vita so its not like I am saying they should abandon it because I don't own them.
Its not that easy as to just stop offering games though. Sony would need to decide how the games offered will (or not) be accessed, what happens to owners with PS+ but no PS4 etc.
The alternative of course would be to offer a free non-subscription based online service - like the PS3 so then I won't be forced to pay for PS+ and feel like I don't get 'value' for money compared to my PS3 gaming. It may make Sony actually have to offer something more worthwhile to entice owners to pay for PS+. Alternatively offer BC on PS3 games and try and match 'Gold' - people may not feel so 'ripped off'.
I know you can draw parallels with MS's Gold BUT compared to the original concept of Gold, it has increasingly offered value since its inception. Yes it allowed you to play online, then introduced games you could keep in competition to IGC and now as an XB1 owner, you get 4 games a month - 2 to keep whatever (XB360 BC games) and 2 XB1 games that are yours as long as you keep up your subscription but they still offer AAA games across both - that's more value than a PS4 owner gets! Arguably PS4's PS+ has decreased in value as the quality of games has decreased and now have to pay for online which was previously free...
There is no easy answer in reality of course.
easy suggestion free DLC free movie rentals. discount you could use on any ps store game. Some easy suggestions to Sony.
I don't see any improvements happening for PS4 if PS+ is dropped on PS3. Honestly, they would just be cutting the service from millions of gamers and soon they would probably stop all online services for PS3... Maybe it's quite rare to find someone playing past-gen systems in US or UK, but if you look in Latin America, there are still lots of gamers playing them. Personally, even when I do buy a PS4, I'll still play PS3; I recently bought Ni No Kuni, amazing game, and it's the only system where I can play all the Kingdom Hearts series (which is my favorite series btw).
They have more than enough games to keep the service on all consoles. Besides if they really do ditch ps3 and vita I think the service on ps4 will stay the same so we wouldn't win from it
Just when I thought we didn't have enough ps+ related posts.
Then again, that's what attracts traffic, so what do I know...
Its difficult for Sony as people who only have a vita or ps3 may have bought a plus sub for the games - remove support and i imagine they will get alot of angry people. I think it would be reasonable to start winding down ps3 at this point though, but absolutely not the vita. There are so many brilliant games that could be offered. There are many japanese series for instance where giving away one game might make me get more in the series like hyperdimension or atelier etc. Its a fallacy to say the vita has no games - its simply untrue so it would be great to see some of the more unusual titles get offered. To be honest though, some of the comments left, particularly on the blog are horrendous and entitled. Could sony do better? Absolutely, and i have faith that in time they will.
No way we at least get some decent games on the PS3 .
@BAMozzy Offering a free service would be cool but just wouldn't sustainable in keeping PSN running efficiently, and BC of PS3 is already impossible on PS4 anyway. @Rob_230 I know the Blog comments have been disgusting over the past year, yet they wonder why the staff don't engage with them as much.
How about a choice of games or no games? Those that choose no games pay $30 per year and still get Plus dicounts but none of the "free" games offered that they never play anyway. Those that choose no games would have the option to pay $5 per game for any of the "free" games offered.
I would not be surprised if the percentage that choose no games is over 80%.
@NoCode23 If that's the case, then less money for Sony. I don't see them doing that.
It's incentive to buy those systems if you don't already own them. However I'd rather see them remove one game from the Vita and one from the PS3 and give one more PS4 game instead.
can you still by a new vita in uk never mind games
A point that people seem to be ignoring is that PS+ isn't just the monthly freebies on PS3/Vita, it also includes discounts on games. I buy many PS3 games because they are so cheap during sales with the PS+ discount. Quite a few of these games were only bought because of that additional discount and would have otherwise skipped. So, not only is this a benefit for PS+ members that still actively purchase games on the PS3 it helps increase sales, and presumably revenue, for Sony. Incidentally, even with over 200 PS3 games in my library, I still enjoy the new freebies each month. Usually at least one free game is something that provides a couple hours of fun and sometimes there are games I wouldn't have tried otherwise.
@Nickolaidas absolutely. This is why Physical will always trump digital. Too bad you can't get an update disc!
For precedent: Sony has already shut down their servers for Playstation Mobile titles.
These articles get boring only the sales make it worth having PS Plus. Online gaming costs money to maintain with all the users and options.
Internet users can be horrible sometimes with terrible verbal abuse and then get mad for getting no answers.
Sometimes I can laugh about people for saying that Sony owns them for less then €5 a month.
I love my indie games and the fantastic sales with some triple A titles which i don't care about anyway. And to be honest if I like a game I wont wait until it hits PS Plus.
And the new generation or older cheapskates will keep complaining anyway. If they get a triple A game it is a game they don't like. Or it's to old or it is crap.
And why does everyone think that you will get more or bettee games when they drop the old systems. You will never get GTA, COD,BF, FIFA with plus it is just to expensive and no way realistic for € 50......
Interesting poll results. I thought more people would be in favour of leaving PS3 and Vita behind.
@Flaming_Kaiser A 1000% thus.
Support Vita, ditch PS3
I have said they should drop them, But! I don't think it would do much good. Would it really help? We are still not going to see big AAA games for the small amount they would save on Vita and PS3 games. I like the idea of a VR title. I have a pre-order in. Even a small tech demo would do. I don't know how long even that could last. I buy a lot of games I fear getting even a smaller AAA game I would already own them! Like Gat out of Hell I got long ago with Saints Row.
Its mostly the multiplayer crowd that nags about Plus. They don't care for the games anyway. They feel forced to join for multiplayer and hate indies. Anyone who just joined for the games can and would just quit the service. They are never going to be happy unless multiplayer is FREE and they don't have to join.
Anyway It a good idea if it could improve some of the current games we get. I am all for it.
@NoCode23 $5 per game times 72 games = $360 a year!!! its now $49 a year. Are you crazy? besides the games are a free bonus you are paying for your multiplayer access, cloud saves, discount access and auto updates not the games. even if you were just playing for the games it works out to $0.68 cents each. People expect a lot for $0.68cents
Sony might as well phase out PS3 "freebies" sooner rather than later what with their massive profit margins to lame Megadrive style "freebies" ratio on PS4..(i love high quality indies though i must say) As for the Vita,i was considering getting one until it became apparent its definitely being completely phased out all together..Apparently pretty much every Sony product is failing profit wise other than PS4,imo they should spend on beefing up the specs for Neo a bit.I feel those who make the decision about high res vs 60FPS (shareholders/producers/publishers?) still don't understand that most gamers have the discernment that increased frame rate is much more desirable,Having said that - side issue but i think that Scorpio will struggle power wise due to running on windows 10,closed architecture or not,massive system hog of an OS..Sorry off topic a bit but my point is Sony has got all this massive profit but haven't said anything to my knowledge about making 60fps standard or at least more common,on their flagship product which is one of the most requested features - it seems they'd rather throw that cash at an upscaled 4K/30fps and gimmicky stuff thats just a hole in the pocket for them and the consumer (you name it,PSVR i predict will be included) Just hoping for more games to be 60fps on Neo,ideally patching up some of the current 30fps games..
I'm sorry, Sony might have abandoned the Vita in terms of software support, but it still is their current gen handheld, and they should still support it with free games. It's not the same situation as with the PS3. Poll choices ought to reflect that.
Vita/PS3 support isn't taking away better IGC releases from PS4, either. Even if Sony drops PS+ support from those two systems, PS4 is still going to get the same two or three forgettable indie games every month.
@KratosMD Sony has already addressed that issue i think. If i remember, they shut down psn on the psp but all of your purchases can still be accessed via the store on pc and the files downloaded onto your hard drive. Can then transfer files accross to psp. Imagine it would work in a similar way on ps3/vita. Just in case though i am using the content manager feature on the vita to transfer my games to pc as backup in case something did happen.
@Ralizah agreed. I dont like the talk of vita being a 'legacy' system. Its still getting a handful of games a week, with many more still to come. It is very much still a current gen system. I play mine every single day. Should definitely have an option to keep vita
@Rob_230 Sammy seems really hung up on this idea of the Vita being a "legacy" system that Sony should stop supporting completely. It would be quite stupid for Sony to unnecessarily make enemies by giving Vita owners the middle finger like that. It would also make PS+ subscriptions much less appealing to a lot of people.
@Rob_230 What about patches of games you install/download? Can you find them on the pc store?
@adf86 People are not realistic what do you would get for less then €5 a month. Nice to see someone agree some.
@Flaming_Kaiser The point is as far as i'm concerned is these 8 bit style eye hurting "freebies" are a stupid gimmick of a product in the first place..false advertising gimmick as well from Sony to claim that they are some type of cool free bonus..Inevitably its going to mean corners are cut somewhere else..its a waste of everyone's time at the very least..
@adf86 It was meant kind of 'tongue in cheek'. There is no easy answer for this. I know that Sony can't cut off the PS3/Vita even though there are very few people left who game on those systems with any regularity and have PS+. The fact that cutting them off could have ramifications about playability of the games they have, potential reimbursements of subscriptions etc etc. In many ways Sony have created their own Rod. Of course if the PS3/Vita games had been totally free and not playable based on subscription status, it could be 'easier' to set a date as to when this service would end and could reimburse gamers for any 'months' left on subscriptions beyond that date if people want to cancel - It wouldn't affect the games playability of course.
You would think that with the increased revenue of PS+ now its 'necessary' to play games too their full potential, that Sony would have a much bigger budget to deliver a much better quality of game - particularly for PS4 owners, the majority of gamers who own PS+ and paying Sony!
I can understand thinking of dropping the PS3. By the end of the year the PS4 will be 3 years old already.
But dropping the Vita would be way too soon.
There is still ton of life in the system and lots of smaller developers keep supporting them, especially since the player base is bordering on the fanatical at times.
Heck, just look at what's coming up http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1164968&page=1
@Nickolaidas Thats the bigger problem. Dont think there is any solution to get patches. Not a big problem for psp i dont think, but of course implications are huge for PS3/4 and Vita in the future given the number of patches games get these days. I suppose if you transfer game data you have already downloaded to an external hard drive it will include patches, but not everyone will have alternative memory options available. This is definitely something Sony - and the industry more widely - will need to address.
No, they shouldnt drop PS+ support for those systems until they're actually done releasing things on those systems.
Why in the hell would you hamstring yourself from getting more free games? It isnt going to provide a boon of "quality content" for PS4 all of a sudden.
The actual poll question should read "Do you want Sony to do less things and get paid for it....or do you want them to support the systems they still sell?"
They're already known for dropping support, let's not push them to drop even more.
Yes but they should be replaced by 2 30 day psnow games of your choice
For all the people who say sod you guys who've purchased virtual games locked to PSN account. How would you like it if the games, movies or music you bought on Apple store, Google play, etc suddenly are no longer available on your new phones/tablets? Those games bought on those virtual stores do not have an expiry date and by law the consumer has rights to access those games. If the consumers right is then taken away expect lawsuits. If new games sold virtually are to be taken away after a couple of years then show an expiry date!! steam does it right on PC...every game purchased can still be downloaded. If PSN locks out ps3 or ps vita owners I can see many fans leaving the brand or no longer trusting the SONY to give us ownership of our purchases. I'd stop buying console online games and stick to physical media. 3DS I only buy physical now. Creating this division amongst fans would lose confidence similarly to the street fighter V fiasco or Xbox one early DRM always on fiasco. Or provide an alternative way to for us fans to access/play the ps3/ps vita games we bought. Eg. Emulators on ps4 and android!!!
@bbq_boy games youve paided for on psn which have a plus discount you can still play, its the games that are free which are locked out if you dont have plus.
@adf86 I don't think it's always that a game is indie that causes the uproar but more the gameplay of these games, which can often be more of an acquired taste or alienate the majority of AAA title buyers, who enjoy a lengthy campaign or just don't enjoy the rogue like element that appears in so many offerings?
Me, I try all titles offered, some appeal but most don't. Been playing games for years but must admit the big games have probably left me spoilt when it comes to small budget offerings, but I'm wandering off topic now
Absolutely not. The PS3 install base is far too large & the vita is far from dead (there's a great neogaf thread that list over 200 English releases THIS year) with all the third party support. Imo PS+ & the IGC should always support the current & last console generation.
With the vita there's a constant flow of new releases each week. Just last week we got Shiren: The Wanderer (metacritic 86) & in Japan the vita version of a game will often outsell the console version. I just don't see Sony shafting Japan with the vita given how well it's doing.
Sony are struggling to give us 2 'good' PS4 games a month. I don't think cutting loose the vita & the PS3 will free up too many resources. You're essentially taking away from the service & when the games inevitably fail to please a fickle audience there'll be far greater criticism directed at Sony.
Finally why would Sony diminish the PlayStation ecosystem? Having gamers attached to PlayStation across multiple platforms would see them far less likely to switch brands.
PS+ is fine the way it is. Sometimes there's something for you, other times there isn't. There's no pleasing everyone. Just keep giving us those sweet discounts!
@BAMozzy I think a lot of the Plus money goes towards the upkeep of PSN if I'm honest.
@meppi Thanks for the list link. I saw a lot of Telltale backlog games on there. I hope that is confirmed and not rumored!
BTW the PS Vita is not a legacy platform, there are lots of great games on the to be bought.
@bbq_boy But one big difference you pay for Steam games. Free PSN games are a big difference in my eyes.
@adf86 I call BS on that! 20m at £40 a year = £800m a year!! During the PS era, they still maintained the PSN (and performance isn't significantly better) for FREE. PC Gamers don't have to pay to upkeep a network - that's what I pay Broadband for. Maintaining a few servers around the world is hardly expensive. Activision (for example) has its own servers for online gaming or use your 'console' as a server.
I find it infuriating Sammy wants the vita and PS3 dropped and posts articles like this trying to encourage people to feel the same. Glad to see so many people still agree with supporting the vita and PS3 through.
I can assure you all that SONY will not suddenly give better games to the PS4 crowd just because they don't offer vita or PS3 games anymore. That's just absolutely laughable.
@BAMozzy Fine whatever, but I guarantee that not all the money from Plus goes to IGC, chances are it's what helps fund games and discounts etc.
@AG_Awesome Sammy keeps posting pictures of Taylor Swift but I still haven't bought any of her albums, though I might now if it annoys Kanye.
I believe he's only encouraging discussion on an issue.
@stevejcrow lol, as good a reason to buy her stuff as any.
I hope that's the case as I typically like Sammy. I've just so often seen "unbiased" reporters use their forum to do articles/discussions that have a hidden agenda. Plus his comment about being "surprised" at the amount of people that wanted to keep the PS3/Vita on plus kind of irked me. What exactly is so surprising about people wanting support for a system/feature they purchased?
And the mandatory (how many games use/are online to be played) PlayStation Plus subscription is a big part of why I still do not have a PS4. I never did and do not want a PlayStation Plus subscription period. I have no problem purchasing a game if like it (but will always get physical over digital), so to say there are some free games is "Meh, who gives a crap" for me. I guess the PS3 will be the end of my PlayStation experience that started back in '96. I still have brand loyalty for the older systems but say hypothetically Samsung came out with game console with no need to pay for a subscription to play online... I don't know.
@adf86 Of course it doesn't go to just IGC. A small portion will go to the maintenance of the Network - not a significant portion but it will still need paying for. It certainly doesn't cover 'sale' prices though - they don't give the 10% to developers to compensate - it just means that Sony take a much smaller cut than those without PS+ of the 'profit' but makes the PS+ seem more attractive for customers. Most of the money goes to Sony's profits. Whether they invest that into new games, R&D for new consoles, buying exclusive 3rd party deals, advertising costs, paying the CEO's, attending/running games events (E3, TGS, PSX etc) or just adding to their overall 'profit' margin for the benefit of investors, its a guaranteed income!
'Sales' can be seasonal or hit and miss. Consoles tend to slow down over time, games are not guaranteed to hit target figures or even launch when expected and certain times of the year can be very quiet for Sony. Whilst PS+ may fluctuate a bit in terms of numbers, having 20m subscribers pretty much guarantees them an income of £800m a year if nothing else sells. The less Sony has to pay out on IGC, the more profit can be made. Gaming division maybe doing well but Other areas haven't done so well of late...
I feel Sony should keep PS3 & Vita in Plus as long as possible.
I only got Plus about a year and half ago, and then I bought a Vita just for the Plus games!
Are they allowed under the Plus contract to repeat games, I missed many early ones...
@Rudy_Manchego
As far as I know all those games should be confirmed.
But you never know with delays or even cancelations.
I'm actually shocked they haven't weened off the ps3 by now. The way its going, ps3 will be retired when the PS5 comes out.
Show Comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...