question about PS4 version

[Alhanelem]

On ps4 you don't need plus to play ffxiv or any other MMO that's coming for that console.

But you do need it to play most nonMMO/f2p games. again, paying for something that used to be free.

[ashikenshin]

But you do need it to play most nonMMO/f2p games. again, paying for something that used to be free.

yeah if you want to play them online. Last generation it was free to play online multiplayer and yet I still paid because of the games you get with it. I have only bought one game for my ps vita and have played different games like the uncharted one and gravity rush a lot ( i only bought dragon's crown). On the ps3 I got to play a lot of games that turned out to be quite fun. If it weren't for ps plus I wouldn't have bought them.

I get what you are saying but if you don't want to do it then don't. I get a lot of value out of my 50 bucks a year.

I do game on the PC also and it's great with the steam sales and humble bundles. I don't see an issue here.

[Alcyon_Densetsu]

But you do need it to play most nonMMO/f2p games. again, paying for something that used to be free.

Don't know it you're trolling, I should probably ignore these posts of yours but… for the sake of others who read, let's state facts, shall we?

I'm PC player mostly. My bias, if there is one, is rather in favour of the PC most of the time.
However it's universally recognised that PS+ has insanely good value.
Digging deeper into the business model that's behind, here are a few things to consider:

• Whereas developers could run servers themselves for multiplayer, there's a good chance that a mutualised datacenter provides much better quality at a much lower cost. It benefits game makers and game players. Sony repeatdly stated that they don't make much profit (if at all) from PS+, the price point is tailored to maintain the service and increase the value of the PlayStation platform and its products. It used to be free, but the overall cost of running multiplayer (MP) servers was overall much higher, and was at the publisher's expense, which doesn't help driving game prices down, nor having top quality for a MP experience.
• It's a sound logic that Microsoft invented on the Xbox (Xbox Live Gold), however they've been much more greedy (higher price, less perks, ads on top of it…) and admittedly Sony just got much better at it with their PS+ service.
• It also allows Sony to essentially mass-buy games licences for their PS+ subscribers, which is good for developers (who get a steady or huge base revenue for their games) and gamers (who get tons of free games). It's a perfect illustration of a win-win situation. It gives incredible value to the PlayStation ecosystem.

Here's food for thought: One Year of PlayStation Plus Value In Free Games: $1854.86 (a one-year sub costs $49.99)
Consider the incredible list of games you get for free once you're subscribed: that's just awesome.

I'm a PC gamer, but I would subscribe to a PS+ service any day if it were available. It's like Steam Deals on steroids! (and on average I spend much more that $5 a month on Steam, to get much less games overall).

There is just no sound argument to claim that PS+ is bad. It just isn't. It's a great thing for this industry, an overwhelming proportion of insiders and customers agree.