Nothing is sustainable in life. You take a good deal when theres a good deal going.
Yeah only if you actually use it. But if you buy other games throughout the year and spend months playing those, you've paid for 12 months but used far fewer than that which means you would have been better of with a monthly sub.
An annual sub is effectively a lootbox where you dont really know which games you've paid for or will like, and thats why its cheaper. You're locked in even if you dont like it or you dont use it.
Because when you pay annually, you pay for months even when you dont like the new additions to the service and you arent playing any other games on the service at that time.
Dont believe the shills when they say people with subscriptions dont buy and play other games because we still buy and play other games and during that time we dont want to be paying a subscription that we're not making use of.
Pay monthly is a far superior option. Sony need to be...
It's a... remakester.
But the main issue is Sony (and other publishers) think that their games are worth sticking a £70 RRP on them when none of them have been able to hold that price at retail for longer than a week.
It depends on the PS4 model and which SSD or HDD you had.
You'll never be proud as long as you stick with live service. People want complete, tested and working games on day 1 which dont have any microtransactions. 'Live service' is a red flag that basically says 'I'll still be unfinished 6 months later, might as well wait for me in the bargain bin'.
@ venomcarnage89
You're incorrectly assuming:
1) That I think MS will foot the bill "all the time"
2) That the devs are not getting their wages, or are in danger of not getting their wages.
3) That you deserve an explanation as to how, and what proportion of the money spent by consumers on any given company ends up going towards the HR budget.
My point is simply that MS are footing the bill from their own will and choice. Th...
It's strange that only this exclusive got such excessive hate that it reached a meta user score of 2.0, but other exclusives which dont have always online and dont have microtransactions didnt do too badly. Hmmm, yeah it must be down to those pesky trolls from the other platform, and absolutely nothing at all to do with millions of playstation gamers who despise always online requirements and microtransactions.
I guess this is why everything is so expensive these days. People literally asking not to get stuff on a good deal, worrying about the millions that billion dollar organisations may lose. Smh
@ApocalypseShadow
The basic assumption is that Sony are smart enough to make agreements where Devs will be paid according to the content consumed by the subscriber and these fees wouldn't exceed the revenue generated from each subscription.... You know a bit like how every other streaming service works.
People who think Sony would make a loss are fixated on their original ps+ agreement where Sony pay for a set number of games per month. It's an inferior mod...
But if you're a loyal customer you'll have realised the vast majority of games have already been on ps now for many years or been ps+ games in the past.
The new additions are great but they would be since they're launching a new service but as mentioned above, the frequency with which quality titles are added is what will determine whether it's a gamepass competitor or not. If it's similar to the quality of new additions ps now had, its not going to keep...
Nah, that was just the excuse peddled by the shills who couldnt accept that Kaz turned to the dark side with always online and MTX.
LMAO so now the "Gt7 HaS tO bE aLwAyS oNlInE bCuS FiA" bullshit no longer applies, maybe they can republish the game without the shitty always-online requirement?
Nice video. I never knew the CPU had a 180w TDP, looks like theres plenty of room for improvement.
There are a lot of great titles in there especially for those new to PlayStation, but for loyal customers, the vast majority of the extra tier games look like repeats from games we've already had the chance to play for years and years via PS+ and/or PS Now. PS4 has thousands of games, they could have added loads more new ones that we didnt already get on PS+ and PS Now.
Damn, you've just won the biggest shill on the internet award with that comment
But it's not a full remake. A lot of the assets especially the audio and SFX are from the original (probably enhanced and better compressed) and a lot of the graphic assets were not remade either, they were just replaced with equivalent assets made for TLOU2 as explained in one of the official videos. It's a hybrid of a remaster and a remake.
Be thankful for getting content from a subscription service we paid for?? Were you dropped on your head?
The dev gets less money from people who bought the game on disc used and are getting the free upgrade, compared to people who downloaded it on ps+ but aren't getting the free upgrade
Because when people pay for monthly subscription services, the financial situation of the parent company providing the service 3 years down the line is the least relevant piece of information when making a decision.
Its only on N4G where deal savvy consumers are outnumbered by shills but in the real world no shill is going to convince a customer to turn down a good deal because they somehow think that they'll save a multi-billion dollar company by doing so.