Hello again new person *waves*
So who else has been won over by the PS4? Up until I heard about The Order 1886 I wasn't to push on getting one and I knew I was not going to be getting a xbone, but Alternative history Victorian London is a weakness of mine and then they mention Oddworld and I was sold // Plus the fact that it's going for €399 is pretty sweet
Though truth be told I don't much care for FF XV, Kingdom Hearts 3 or even Destiny
Elf Defiler Korgan:
Why are people making decisions now? I own all (previous) gen consoles and I didn't buy a single one till at least 3-6 months after release, what with things like OS patches, policy changes and oh yeah...an actual game library, I figure let those with more money than sense dive in first, plus whatever the professional critics/journalists have noticed along the way.
Console history has shown us that without a doubt; the look of the console, the hardware, the first wave of titles available, (hell even the goddamn price!) ultimately means nothing, it's a weird organic, (gamer) culture process that ultimately can't ever be predicted.
My point: Just wait! Sony is indeed coming off way better than MS, but if I could look a year into the future and see that *insert any gaming platform* is dominating I won't be surprised whatever the result, just happy that I held off and backed a winner.
I too always wait. The games lure me over, not much else. As long as I don't get f***ed by new dodgy policies, as xbox is pushing, I'll jump in, but later.
This is my train of thought too, it rarely pays to be an early adapter with this sort of stuff and most of the games I am interested in I can play on PC for now. Best to wait a couple of years for the next-gen consoles to come down in price a little and maybe for MS to back-peddle on some of their policies.
Also Nasrin if you are reading this, you still come off as a little nervous, but you have no need to be because you are doing great!
I realise this is different for those outside of the UK, but here in Britain we have a TV Licence. As the site puts it, "You need to be covered by a valid TV Licence if you watch or record TV as it's being broadcast. This includes the use of devices such as a computer, laptop, mobile phone or DVD/video recorder."
So, I can buy a TV, plug it into my PS3 and use it as a monitor. That's fine. But if I want to use it as a television I need a licence.
Likewise, I can legally own a car without any kind of insurance, driving licence or road tax... I just can't drive it.
A great many things in our lives require additional payment elements. The PC I am using right now to type this is a prime example - owning it does not entitle me to free internet.
This is the mindset by which I think we are expected to view XBL and PSN+. Well, PSN+ at any rate; we're not allowed to 'own' an Xbone or any of the media on it.
As far as this model goes, PSN+ does appear to be a better one than most. You can still use your PS4 for prety much everything you might want to do with it, you just can't game online. One could rationalise this as being asked to pay to keep the server's online. However, PSN+ isn't just "pay up or don't play" like the god-awful XBL. PSN+ is honest to God value for money. I've downloaded ten games this year alone off of PSN+ that I didn't have to pay for, ranging from Thomas Was Alone to Hitman: Absolution and everything in between. Ten games for £40, with more titles becoming available as the year goes on? That's pretty sweet right there!
So really, that is what I think of myself as paying for. I get PSN+ so I can download £400 worth of games for 1/10th the price. I won't notice the changeover, simply because I'm mystified why more people don't have PSN+ already.