Topic: I ❤ PS+ and the IGC

After last nights Switch reveal, I have started to feel we get an incredible deal with the IGC. I've moaned before (we all have right?) but looking at the comparable switch service, I am so glad I game on the PS. We may await AAA games and usually get indies, but I understand this practice and some of the games we get are immense when given the chance.

Thanks Sony please keep operating this amazing service.

Nintendo paid too much attention to all the PlayStation Plus moaners sarcastically saying they "love getting NES games every month".

To be honest, I think PS Plus does need a shake-up, but I agree that it's still quite good. The discounts rarely get mentioned but are often very strong.

I've saved plenty of money thanks to discounts offered by PS Plus so I can't complain about the service on that end. I do think PSN needs to be more stable and the 'free' games on offer should have improved by now but there's always give and take it seems. Between PS Plus and XBL Gold, the one area I'd say PS Plus has been better in recent years, imo, is the digital sales.

Overall, this last 8 months has been good and, for me, the discounts are worth the yearly sub as I have saved more than that on purchases. I've also got a large library of PS Plus titles for when times get really hard plus I do occasionally game online.

It can be improved, sure but overall I am not complaining.

PS+ is okay, the discounts are easily the best bit. They do need to mix up the give aways somehow, I'd be happy to see PS3 and Vita give aways go as I don't play these systems anymore.

Not suprised Nintendo are charging now too, I suspect there will be perks included to make it beneficial to their users.

PS+ is awesome.

Got PES2017 for £20 last month. Let the haters hate.
IGC+Discounts+Online security/stability->platform growth = a really great deal

PS+ can be great value for some and others not so much. Online is 'decent' but I wouldn't say its as good as MS's. When it was free on PS3, I was more accepting of this but now its a paid service, I had hoped to see it match Live. That's not to say it hasn't closed the gap. For many, this is the sole reason they bought PS+. For many though, they are now paying for a service that was free before. Whether that was sustainable for Sony or not, who knows - it seems that all consoles will now be charging for online in the future anyway.

The Discounts for being a PS+ member are quite decent. Often though you only get a £1 or 2 saving as its not like the products weren't discounted for non-members. That extra 10% is often not a 'big' saving but its still better than nothing. Prices of AAA games are generally not that great - even in the sale. More often than not, I can find the same game cheaper online in physical format - not always of course. Digital only content though has no competition so these sales are the only way to get some content cheaply. Personally though I prefer to buy Physical and rarely buy DLC content for 'old' games so if/when these do get discounted, its usually too late or already bought. In the 2 years I have had PS+, I have bought 1 game saving me around £1.30 for being a PS+ member - an extra 10% - more often than not though, I save more money by deciding to buy physical. I don't tend to buy the Digital only games either - even when heavily discounted which brings me onto the IGC

As stated, I don't buy the Digital Only games - even when discounted. I don't tend to download them when free - let alone buy when discounted. Before anyone has a go at me, I am not saying they are 'terrible' but I would rather play an older AAA type game, even some last gen AAA games, than a 'new' Indie/Arcade/budget game. Its NOT the fact that these are 'Indie' and I certainly don't want to say 'Indie' means a lack of quality/polish/visual delights etc. I know Indie seems to be more encompassing these days - On XB360 (for example), Indie often meant poor but these were very cheap (pence not pounds), lacked achievements and were separated from the 'Arcade' games like Far Cry:Blood Dragon, Child of Light, Trials (games from big Publishers like Ubisoft). However I also remember how many Sony 'fanboys' used to goad Xbox owners for getting predominantly 'Arcade' games and older AAA games whilst they got a much newer AAA release or two. Now it seems a lot of Sony fans are crying out for older AAA games - like Killzone, Infamous or even Knack. Like I said, I rarely even want to download the games on offer as I would and do tend to prefer to play games in my backlog than these.

The 'Value' of IGC to Sony gamers can depend very much on the number of Sony Platforms they own too. If you own a PS3, Vita and PS4 (assuming you regularly use all), then IGC could well offer up to 6 games and potentially see you through that month. If you only own a PS4 though, chances are you are only going to get 2 games (occasionally a extra game or two thanks to cross-play).

With Gold, you only get 4 games but those 4 games all work on an XB1 and often are AAA games too. Chances are that at least 1 of the GwG games on offer will appeal to some degree. Its not like Gold doesn't offer weekly discounts on digital content either.

Point I am making is that PS+ can be a great value option for some people. The IGC games are only of value if you enjoy playing them and don't already own them - that also goes whether they are AAA or Indie. Discounts are only of value if you prefer to buy digitally and still not always the cheapest option. If you discard the online component, you would have to buy a LOT of games to get your moneys worth via discounts (I know that games can save £20-30 but the savings are often available to non PS+ members too so I am only counting the 'extra 10%' members save). Add in the value of games you could potentially get - especially if you own all 3 platforms, you could easily get your annual PS+ subscription money back in one month. 72 games a year, extra savings on digital content, yes that is or could be great value.

Like I said though, for me, I don't tend to buy digitally and can probably count the hours I have spent playing the free games over two years on my fingers - without needing to take my socks off to include my toes. My PS+ subscription is literally only for online gaming. I still think its worth it and can't count the hundreds even thousands of hours of fun that has given me but in terms of 'value' its not as good value to me as Xbox Gold is and there is room for improvement in all aspects.

I certainly won't be cancelling (or not renewing more to the point) because the value of Online gaming, the hours I spend doing this, makes PS+ worth while. Of course I would like to benefit from better (or should that be more appealing to me) games and yes its 'slightly' disappointing to see each months offerings currently but the true value to me is online access, thee ability to play all my games and access to all content. If I get a 'game' I want or on the very rare chance a digital game is offered at a discount that can't be matched by physical (I would still pay up to £5 more for physical anyway) - BONUS!

@booshy89: Great story Boosh, Free games are a win for us all plain and simple. For people like you and me who by the looks of things play anything that moves on a screen - then its a modern day miracle.

@kyleforrester87: " I'd be happy to see PS3 and Vita give aways go as I don't play these systems anymore. "

I don't follow that train of thought, I've downloaded maybe 5 games off igc for the vita in the last 12 months. But they have all been brilliant. Vita owners pay the same for psplus, so why cut them out? There is no guarantee the PS4 offerings will improve - we've got 5 games this month on ps4!

@Fight_Teza_Fight: Yes Teza, I'm with you mate. I'm a lover not a hater.

@Gamer83: Comparing to xlive is one thing, comparing to switch paid online is another. I think we can all agree psplus and xlive is a better proposition than that. I do miss the speed of xbox live and the party system was well better on the 360 from what I can recall.

@themcnoisy: Well I don't use my PS3 or Vita so it wouldn't be a loss to me, can't speak for others

@BAMozzy: Lets get some extra value for you mate, Tuesday evening we will be using both party chat and online gaming I can imagine you, Shane, boyfrommars and dangermouse being a pro team. (I will cheer you guys on)

Do you use your vita Bam?

@themcnoisy: I don't have a Vita. I couldn't justify buying one as I never game on the go. I never used my DSi so ended up given that to my son. The only gaming I do is on the big screen LOL. I haven't turned my PS3 (or XB360) on for probably a year or two so its not like I benefit from IGC games on either of these Platforms. Technically I could download the PS3 games but given the choice of playing on that, my XB1s or PS4 Pro, I really can't see it happening.

At least with BC on XB1s, I am more likely to have the console on anyway and I can play XB360 games with my XB360 and XB1 friends so their is more chance of me benefiting.

Its not like I am not used to paying 'just' for online gaming - I was paying for Gold long before they introduced GwG. I never bought into PS+ until I bought my PS4 and see it as no different. I can understand though how some people are very disappointed - especially those that bought into PS+ for the games on PS3. Its understandable why they may feel somewhat cheated as they are paying the same (or more in some cases) each year for a lower quality of games. On PS3, they were getting much more for their money essentially as online was free.

@themcnoisy: Personally I dont see Plus automatically being a good service based on it probably being better than one of its competitors. For me this paid online business model is literally killing console gaming and I refuse to pay for it. When Plus was optional on PS3 I was subscribed for years to it, now I no longer pay for it as I can see no good reason for the charge for online existing.

The announcement of a similar model on the Switch was basically my cue to lose interest in the system, I thought Nintendo may have not followed the other two given they are playing catchup, but unfortunately they have now followed the lead on this gaming tax. How everyone seems so accepting of the practice truly baffles me, but I know I'm in the minority in the console gaming community so I'll leave it there before I upset someone

I am not 'accepting' as such but its a necessity and I have NO choice but to pay to play online. It wouldn't be so bad if I felt I got my moneys worth back from the other aspects like IGC or via discounts or combination of both. Its more acceptable because the cost is relatively low and the amount of enjoyment and time I spend online makes it an acceptable cost - otherwise I wouldn't pay but that doesn't mean I agree with the practice. Being held to ransom to play a game I bought to its fullest, over the internet which I pay for too on a console I have already bought doesn't make sense at all.

When MS first launched Gold back on the original Xbox, I refused to buy it but then with the XB360, I felt I had no choice but to buy it to play ALL the games and content. When GwG came out, it made it far less of a issue because I got more than I spent back over the course of the year and those games were 'free to keep' regardless. Of course I could easily recoup my money buying digital games at discounts too.

I never opted for PS+ on PS3 because the games were never truly mine and felt I was blackmailed into maintaining a subscription to keep playing and there was no guarantee that I would find enough games worth downloading. A lot of the games I wanted, I already owned and the others were games I could wait to pick up for little money in a retailers sale. To a degree that's still true with both GwG and IGC.

IF online was free, I certainly wouldn't subscribe to either service - even though I do prefer GwG's offerings more. I wouldn't subscribe to get ANY of the 4 games I could play on XB1 and certainly wouldn't bother for IGC as I rarely see anything of interest to me - even vaguely interesting.

I know that if MS and Sony offered a tier system where you could pay less for online only, I would opt for that. If they cancelled online charges, I would drop both Gold and PS+ immediately. Its the fact that I have NO choice if I want to play ALL my games and ALL online components. I spend more online than I do playing offline - not that I enjoy online more, its just that online offers more hours than an offline SP only game does. If I cancelled my Subscription, the majority of my games would be virtually useless now - nothing but coasters. Games like Destiny, Battlefield/Battlefront, CoD, Titanfall etc are predominantly online games and those that have offline SP, I have already finished. I am nowhere near finished playing the online though.

Its like other utility bills, if I want electricity, want to have internet access etc, I have no choice but to pay. I know I could buy a PC and not have the 'online' charge but I don't really want to game on a PC

@BAMozzy: Probably should have said most people, but I guess after being told things like I'm entitled and similar in the past I put a slightly more negative spin on the issue than I should. I find it a little funny that there are a fair few people I've spoken to on various message boards who would mock Xbox owners last gen for paying for online, but now defend Sony for doing the same as if it was their own company.

To be fair I do see a few people not happy about the situation, but merely pointing out they pay because they have no other choice. It would take a big shift in consumer habits to change anything and I know my refusal to pay is a drop in the ocean in the grand scheme of things, but I'm not one to break my own rules on what I think is right for convenience so I think this (among a few other things) has killed any future console gaming for me after the PS4 is put out to pasture.

I liken PS+ to a TV licence (UK). Both offer entertainment services. Just because I bought the platform doesn't mean I have access to all of its content.
Over time as the number of users on the platform increases, the price of the platform drops. There is less profit per console that pays for the services, but the cost of these services increases. A cut of these profits also go to funding original content- free or paid. Admittedly they would make that back from increased software sales, but Sony aren't in the charity business.
That's why I don't have a problem with PS+. It's actually a really good deal. Sony could drop the IGC & it would hardly affect their subscriber numbers imo.

Its only a matter of time before PS+ becomes mandatory anyways.

@Fight_Teza_Fight: Sony could drop the IGC & it would hardly affect their subscriber numbers imo.

Doubt this, if igc disappeared loads of gamers would too. If xbox, switch and ps4 all have mandatory online payments then its another tick in the box to move to PC. I'm not preempting the demise of the igc but its equally why we should be championing games for vita and ps3 - they cost Sony next to nothing anyway, and its a nice alternative for people without a ps4. I'm gaming right now on this platform as Sony are way more in tune with what I want as a gamer, that includes the original and best paid for online service due to the free games.

@themcnoisy: I can only speak for myself, but I'd certainly stay subscribed if the IGC dropped. I haven't played any of the games that were offered seriously since Outlast (I didn't really like Rocket League). I just try them and delete them these days, or I've already purchased them and enjoyed them.

@themcnoisy: That proposal would come with a price drop or added bonuses ( free PS Now, PlayStation Vue?)

I don't see IGC or games with gold as a system seller. They are nice bonus to have. You might see a little change in the US/U.K.- world wide, no? But I imagine most just pay the fee cause they have to.
I really like the IGC but it's like a go on a £1 scratch card. Sometimes you win, sometimes you don't.

PS+ as a whole is awesome though. Hope they start fading out PS3 & add PSVR soon.

@Fight_Teza_Fight: I've never won on a scratch card though lol.

@kyleforrester87: That surprises me since your point of view last year, I'm much more in the camp you were in. I like getting indies now, I can actively buy retail games without the nagging thought they may be on igc.

@themcnoisy: I've no issue with the indies being offered on PS+ but if a game looks good I'll generally get it when it launches or when it shows up in a sale, so by the time it comes round on the IGC I've already played it. Of course that's my problem for not waiting so I won't slate the monthly offerings just because I wasn't patient. That said though I think even the indie offerings have been a bit subpar in recent months.