I've had to stick with the basic tier. I don't play nearly enough games to warrant more access to stuff, especially with the rise in prices. I have a friend who has the premium tier, which I feel would be wasted with me.
That's fair. It's certainly not cheap, and you have to have actually been planning on purchasing a number of games before the middle tier pays for itself. For me though, I was surprised how little tempted I am by their lower or higher tiers. My girlfriend had the lowest tier for a while when we met, and the three games per month are nice, especially if you've been doing it for a while, but there's also a lot of months where there's nothing much of interest, at least for me. The highest tier, on the other hand, is mostly middling PS1 games it seems, which also doesn't appeal to me.
Yeah, for me the 3 games per month are just fine. Sometimes I'll even luck out on it being something I've wanted to play. But I don't feel like I need more than that, and going up a tier would just mean I'm not taking advantage of it and being overwhelmed. I mostly have it for playing with friends.
I got the premium tier because I hadn't owned a console in forever and had only ever owned a ps2 in terms of playstation. It was def. worth it the first year but it auto-renewed on my birthday (I knew it would) and I'm not entirely happy with myself for letting it do that. I feel like I should've probably dropped to the middle tier with the price increase and because the first year gave me plenty of opportunity to explore the backlog. Too late now but that's probably what I'll do next year. (The old price would prob still be worth it but the new price is hard to justify). As for this gen.... IDK, this was the first gen since the Wii that I bothered to even buy a console and I have been impressed with the hardware. Games on console finally look on par with PC (even if it's mid-range and with some asterisks). If consoles would let me unlock them without fear of punishment so I could mod to my heart's content, they'd be the best they've ever been. Now software wise.... between COVID and the Xbox S, I really feel like this gen's games have been hamstrung from the start. Backwards compatibility for this long is a joke. Ensure that the new can run the old but underpowered machines shouldn't be holding back new games and they are. That's always been a problem on PC (consoles basically determine how good a game will be and their limits, limit even PC players - something I've bitched about a lot as a PC gamer) but Xbox took that a step further when they demanded any game released on X has to be released on the S as well. There have been precious few games that have actually taken advantage of the new hardware and THAT really sucks. Both Sony and Microsoft have pushed backwards compatibility far too long... I understand there was a console shortage due to covid but it's also way past time for games for THIS gen. So far, Spider-Man 2 and Horizon Forbidden West have been the only ones that actually looked and felt this gen. Even God of War: Ragnarok didn't really feel this gen and truth be told it wasn't - it was designed for ps4 because that still had a larger player base. And then there's the Switch.... a great system but a system that is quietly holding back games because devs want to be able to release a playable port.
Hamstrung is a good description. Yeah, it's one thing to be backwards compatible, and I think the plan was originally going to be transitional in the amount of ps4 games that would still be released, but I think the pandemic really put a wrench in their plans. I don't feel this gen has been typical in that sense, which is why I've felt it's needed more time to mature. I think the writing was on the wall as soon as manufacturers and developers saw the scarcity issue and the fact that it wasn't going to be an easy thing to solve. And It's hard to tell at this point, but it doesn't feel much like we'll get very much that really end up pushing the hardware like in the past, which usually come towards the end of the cycle. There are still some PS4 games that still look better than some PS5 games. For instance, I know that while Mass Effect: Andromeda has had its issues, I personally feel it looks like a PS5-era game despite it being a PS4-era game. The fact that there are many games from that generation looking better than the current generation is also what is causing disappointment in the hardware, imho. This generation feels more like a bridge more than anything despite the fact that it's better hardware in general, but hardware that isn't really being pushed. Most of the benefits from this gen, I feel are directly the result of using SSDs, and I feel this is what this generation will be remembered for the most. Not the graphics, but the short loading times and the ability to jump directly into games. You know, one aspect I've been disappointed about with the current gen, and I'm not sure if it's because of the issue related to not enough exclusively current gen games being developed pushing the envelope, but the haptic feedback on the controllers which they were hyping up so much actually feels like a step down to me from last gen. Sure, there's resistance in the triggers, but... it feels half-baked? I thought it would allow developers to program different levels of resistance to match what's happening in-game, at least with the PS5, but it's always felt like been at the maximum at all times.
I turned off the entire haptic feedback. At first I thought my controller was broken when pushing the buttons suddenly felt weird at times. And I hate it when a controller vibrates. Such unnecessary features IMO. (It's fine to make them optional but for me at least they were turned on by default.) And now after the latest controller update the controller speaker SHOUTS AT YOU all over again. I almost fell off my chair the first time (and then quickly went to turn down the volume again). Also, I was horrified when I saw Rise Of The Ronin footage and noticed the graphics. This game is supposed to be a PS5 exclusive and this is the best they can do with it? What happened there? It looks like an early PS4 game. Surely they can do better? They don't even seem to WANT to use the PS5's full potential. What annoys me the most tho is that they STILL haven't enabled custom wallpapers for the PS5. I miss my PS4 wallpaper. No, I don't want a game preview wallpaper. I want MY OWN wallpaper. From a screencap I took. Ack. It seems like such a minor thing to implement, and yet...
I play exclusively using a headset, so I've never used the speaker feature on the controller as it it turns it off when you're using a headset. But I'd heard via a video that a new update was coming out that would make the volume on the controller speakers louder. Speaking of wallpaper, I hear that's coming soon in a future patch.
Oh yeah, the controller speaker is louder now alright. It practically screams at you even after you've turned down the volume significantly. I keep hearing about the wallpapers "coming in a future patch", too. Problem is, I've been hearing this ever since the PS5 was released.
@ED-209 The PS5 is an incredible console for playing / catching up on the PS4 catalogue, which I largely missed. For not-cross-gen PS5 games? I might own one. It hasn't lived up to expectations on that front, no. GOW: Ragnarok was initially touted as next-gen, only for Sony to backtrack and make it cross-gen. The result was a game that played like a PS4 game with enhancements, rather than a PS5 game that needed a PS4 downgrade (it still would've been a bitterly disappointing experience even if it were PS5-only, truth be told). Same goes for Horizon Forbidden West on release, though after various patches the game now looks exquisite on the PS5. Still, I'm enjoying gaming more than ever. No regrets buying one (and boy were we lucky to scoop one up on release).
I can confirm that Rise of the Ronin is def. not up to snuff graphically. It's also pretty clear Team Ninja had no idea how to make an open world game work from a technical standpoint. Big shortcuts like stuff just breaking apart if you walk into it were taken to make it all work together. And even with all that I still get jagged play at times that has to be due to frames dropping. Most likely, they had no idea how to make the extra AI for NPCs work in a non-gamebreaking way - it's something that messes up console games a lot and why TES and Fallout games are always scaled down compared to what they could be and are often made into on PC. I will say though it doesn't crash so there's that. It's a good game but it's also disappointing. Sony/Team Ninja had no business charging 70 dollars for it and that is my main problem with it. IMO, it's a damn good AA game but it's most certainly not AAA. It lacks polish in almost every way. AND normal mode is ridiculously difficult for certain fights while easy mode is too easy (though I kind of expect that to get patched/balanced later). This is Greedfall or Vampyr (two games I enjoyed but that didn't charge me and arm and a leg or put on airs) posing as a AAA.
Yeah, I understand that, although the video I'd seen showed something from a beta patch, so it's definitely in the pipeline, possibly for the next patch. I think that's an apt description! The first PS5 game I bought was Baldur's Gate 3, to be able to play with friends. That was my main point in the PS5 upgrade seeing as it was the first current-gen digital-only game I'd seen to date. But otherwise, I feel like I wouldn't even have missed the PS5 if I hadn't gotten one. At the very least, with the backwards compatibilty, it's allowed me to catch up on PS4 games I've missed.
That's too bad. And herein, there's part of my gripe with the rise in prices. Yes, I know games are getting more expensive, but in Canada, they've already been high before the price hikes, and it's a disappointment when the expectations don't always line up with the price we pay for things. Especially like say, when a company like Capcom will have microtransations on top of that, it starts to feel like the message they're giving us, is we're not paying enough. If only devs would focus on optimization and improving the experience instead of implementing microtransations.
This is an industry that attempts to charge full price on 5 and 15 year old games, especially on consoles. There’s no limit to the greed and now that the last major independent publishers have been acquired it will only get worse. There’s no downward price pressure in a one storefront ecosystem.
I mean, I understand it from the point of view of games being expensive to develop and only getting more expensive to do so, and especially given how the workplaces have become. Game developers should rightfully be unionized as it's been a long time coming, so I'm all for them making more of a return on their investments. But even taking that into account, there'll be a point where we ask ourselves how much is too much? I'm not paying $200 for a deluxe-edition of a game, sorry. And microtransations on top of all that?? No. But your point on older games is a good one. It seems like prices are more tightly regulated on consoles, and there are certain games that hardly ever go on sale, or don't dip below a certain percent below the original price. And the funny thing is, with the trend on re-releasing games as remasters ensures that they'll almost always be listed at full price. That's the only reason I can think of why Naughty Dog worked on remasters of The Last Of Us Part 1 and 2 not so long after they were released.
I keep hearing that a good reason to get a PS5 is the backwards compatibility that lets you catch up on older games and not the fact that it's supposed to be the latest console where you can play the latest and most advanced-looking games. That's... not exactly an embrace for Sony's current gen approach. I was watching a gaming news video the other day where they said that investors/developers are confused by Sony supposedly pushing a PS5 Pro onto the market because they feel Sony hasn't even used the PS5 to its full potential. That is exactly how I feel as well and I'm just a consumer, not a developer. Yes, the PS5 is nice to use to play older games like Dying Light 2, which ran absolutely horribly on a PS4 and is now a much better experience on PS5, or even Cyberpunk, which seems to run nicely on PS5 now as well, but where are the new games that show us what the console can do? I don't want a PS5 Pro. Hell, so many people have just bought a PS5 since they have only now become widely available. People are not going to buy a PS5 Pro on top of it, especially since we haven't even seen what the PS5 can really do AND money is short for a lot of us right now. I'm also not surprised that Sony halted production of their VR headset thing - it costs as much as a new console! Who can/wants to pay that for a VR headset that you can only use with a selected few games? It's no wonder people aren't buying that thing. And I agree, I absolutely DETEST microtransactions. They have become an absolute pest in the industry. I still find it utterly bizarre that - at least over here - a FIFA game riddled with microtransactions that literally introduce kids and teenagers to gambling can be bought by said kids and teenagers without any restrictions while anything that even smells of violence or anything else considered 'adult' is 18+ (and rightfully so, of course). I mean... what?
Yeah, I think there has to be a healthy balance. The backwards compatibility is a great feature to have, but there's also the expectation that the console will be able to do more with its own hardware at some point. I guess what I'm wondering is if the developers have been told about the PS5 Pro and to target the specs for development. Because all I've been hearing about are rumours going around rather than a concrete confirmation that Sony is putting out a PS5 Pro. I don't think they themselves have said anything. I agree, I don't want a PS5 Pro, or even feel like there's much of a need out there for one. That tech could go in to the PS6 when the time is right. The only reason a PS4 Pro made sense was because 4K came out at the middle of the last generation, and the console manufacturers had to quickly pivot to offering console versions that could do 4K & HDR to match the new TVs coming out. It also gave a new lease on life to the PS4, extending it out a bit further. But we're not in the same situation with this generation; if anything it's slowed due to the pandemic. Anyone pinning their hopes on a PS5 Pro will be sorely disappointed as I don't think it's coming out. Interesting that even developers don't see the purpose. And it actually makes me wonder how many gamers actually game in 4K, as it feels like a small number, let alone those who will be able to game in 8K. Speaking of the PSVR, when I went to buy my PS5 at BestBuy, I had to wait a long while to get the attention of an employee because they were thick in conversation with a customer, trying to convince them about the PSVR, and I felt sorry for both of them.
Yeah the "huh? Now?" was a response to the rumored PS5 Pro itself, not so much towards any specs. Says a lot, too. Even just the idea itself gets a "wait what, we don't see the point" response, lol. In my gaming experience there are some console gamers who always want the latest graphics and to play everything in 4K and whatnot, but that's not a majority in any way. Consoles are usually aimed at a more casual audience - the people who really want the latest specs for everything are usually PC gamers. That doesn't mean that console gamers don't want to see what the PS5 can really do tho, of course. I'm really glad that I can't even play anything in VR (it makes me dizzy), so the question of whether or not to get a VR headset is moot for me anyway, regardless of whether I have the funds or not (I don't). I think Sony really missed to read the room on this one - people do not have a lot of money right now, they choose carefully what to spend it on, and I can't see a headset that's as expensive as a whole new console on the top of a lot of peoples' lists. I know quite a few gamers who still haven't bought a PS5 yet because they either lack the funds or they don't see the need because it's obvious that most current games aren't using the PS5's full potential anyway just yet.
Yeah, exactly. If they're surprised about the rumours circulating around, then that likely means Sony hasn't brought it up with them, which means it's very much likely not happening as much as some would like it to happen. I'm still gaming on a 34" 1080p TV from back before SmartTVs became a thing, so I'm not really getting the most of the PS5 even now, but I'm Ok with that, and I sure as heck wouldn't run out and get a PS5 Pro if there were one. RE VR, I simply don't have the space to use one. My Brother bought a Valve Index several years ago, and whenever I'm visiting I get to use it. It's probably one of the better headsets, but I'm glad I don't have to buy one. I think the market is still too niche, and don't even get me started on the Apple Vision Pro lol. I think they've priced themselves out of consideration for most people and furthering the niche at a time when it could use more affordability in general. The problem with the PSVR is again related to the supply shortage created by the pandemic. It did a lot of damage under the surface, and I think companies are still trying to recover from the effects. You need a PS5 in order to use the PSVR, and the PS4 version of the sets are incompatible with this version. But people have been slow to adopt to the PS5, therein why develop for the PSVR, so it's a double-whammy. And those who bought the PS4 version were likely feeling spurned, so that likely didn't help matters much. What Sony could have done was offered a trade-in program for PSVR 1 sets to have users pay the difference.
Yeah, I agree, and that's what I've been saying. I think it's the single biggest feature and selling point that makes a difference with this generation. It's certainly not the graphics or extra features, but the lightning fast loads made possible by the SSDs.