PS+ hasn't offered a retail game for its first 1.5 year?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the first proper high-profile retail game that PS+ offered since its inception was Tomb Raider Underworld back in December 2011, almost a year and a half after its July 2010 launch where a select few people who sort of "pre-ordered" it in advance got LittleBigPlanet as a freebie?

If so, then why people still complain about Games with Gold program which admittedly came out extremely late within 360's lifespan, but if you compare their initial year of offerings, GwG wouldn't actually fare worse than PS+?

I know that both comparisons are not exactly fair (comparing recent shape of PS+ to GwG now opposed to. comparing their first year of existence from the perspective of 2010 vs. 2013), though the latter still makes more sense than the former.

It can only get better. Quit yo bitchin'. I'm sure it will make its debut on Xbone later on this year.

And don't forget, you had to wait almost 1.5 years for the first proper retail game. But, on the other hand, it wouldn't surprise me if you said that people had to wait 3 years until Microsoft came up with GwG. And you wouldn't be wrong.

I'm hoping EA decides to change the Origin "On the House" game from Dead Space soon. It's been what... three months since they made the offer?

^ You just reminded me to create an Origin account and get it while it's still free :D Thanks!

PS+ is light years ahead of Games with Gold.

@Salt_The_Fries: Nothing you say is wrong, but as you mentioned it's hardly an apples to apples comparison. I think Sony should be commended for their work getting this kind of system going with publishers, and MS should be commended at least for listening to their customers and bringing the idea over. I'd also agree that eventually they'll have it up for the xb1, just a matter of when.

Well here's the problem, PS+ has already been out for a while and is giving people high profile/retail games. So GwG needs to match it, not take it's sweet time to rev up

Do you get to keep playing those games if you stop you subscription.

Can you do anything at all if you stop your subscription?? I guess play single player games and surf the web

/thread

this isnt 2010 any more, its 2014 so why are u comparing the service m$ is providing in 2014 to the one sony was providing in 2010? makes no fukin sense

Didn't Batman and Bioshock Infinite come out recently? Honestly, PSN+ tends to put out games I've already played. Is there even a comparison with PSN+ and Gold? Gold barely compared with PSN free.

Isnt Bioshock Infinite a high profile game?

PS Plus wins. Sony really looks out for gamers worldwide.

Yea I dont remember it taking 1.5 years for a full retail game to come out.

Agreed. Sony should be commended. Also it was a brilliant business move to get subscribers to accept paying for MP. I remember when paying MP threads were the rage here. MS is evil, greedy, blah blah. But leasing some games and suddenly the its not greedy or evil? Brilliant business marketing, because in the end everyone will give up principles when compensated.

It doesnt matter how long PSN+ took to get going because Games with Gold isnt competing with a launch service.

MS needed to match it out of the gate to even make it worth considering and THEN work to improve it.

Honestly, it doesnt matter what games come to GwG. As long as MS insists on locking so many services behind the paywall, the free games kind of lose their luster anyway. XBL is basically mandatory if you intend on owning an Xbox.

True that!

pretty much, and as we all know sheen's would say the same thing in games with gold came out first.....bubububububububububbubububububu games with gold wasn't very good playstation plus has a right.
also Of note games with gold completely destroys the first year of playstation plus and thats a fact you also get to keep the games.

Such a silly comparison. That's like saying "PSN completely destroys the first year of XBL," while true, it makes no sense to compare to something years in the past.

PS Plus demolishes games with gold, i don't think you could even compare the two.

I think this thread kind of back fired.

I think GWG is better than PS+ seeing as how you actually get to keep your games forever.

Well, to be fair. Games with Gold this month is probably better than PS+

Forever? They are digital games on an aging nearly decade old platform that are not able to be carried forward to the new platform. No, you will not get to keep them "forever". You get to keep them as long as your 360 stays in working order and doesn't need replacing after the XBL servers for the 360 are inevitably taken down in the next two to four years.

...except ps+ already got saints row 3 a year ago and gives out more games and covers more systems.

@Randolph: I don't use either service. Can you not back up your digital downloads onto a second hard drive like you can with the Wii U?

Doesn't really matter who did it first or how long it took, it's who does it best. And right now PS+ beats Games with Gold handily.

since ps4 requires ps+ to play multiplayer who the hell isnt going to pay for for it.

Well, the PS5 could come out and be a huge piece of garbage for all we know. Then you lose all of those PS4 games from this gen if you don't keep paying for the service after they shut down online play. Or Sony could go bankrupt and whoever purchases the playstation brand could decide they want to go a different direction than PS+.

The year head start doesn't mean anything unless we are talking about the year head start the Xbox 360 had over the PS3.

Which makes it even sadder that GWG beat PS+ this month.

Sony already has deal with major publisher to put games on plus. MS screw up and now Gold can wait 4 year for game haha.

Actually, that is not the case. A lot of people are switching from the 360 to PS4 this gen. They will get to keep playing their GWG games on their 360 without paying for XBL. Somebody who switched from PS3 to Xbone would have to continue to pay $50 per year for the privilege of going back and playing one of those "free" games on his/her PS3.

and MS offers 8y old titles that cost 1.99 at best so what's better?

XBLG is not a rental service, though. That is why it couldn't happen to either side.

I don't own a 360, and admittedly, these consoles were not really designed with digital libraries in mind. Is there no way to back up your digital purchases? It seems like it would be possible with the PS3, though sort of a pain in the ass. I have no idea on the 360, though.

Well, don't the PS4/Xbone at least let you put your games on an external hard drive? That would solve this issue moving forward, anyway. I know the Wii U does. I can put my digital games on an external hard drive, then plug it into my PC and keep a backup in a folder so I only ever lose those games if both hard drives somehow were to fail simultaneously after Nintendo drops eshop support for the Wii U.

Yeah, lol. I believe PSN+ pisses all over GWG, but I just love how certain people will blather on about how relevant the PS3 catching up to the 360 was and how important giving the PS3 breathing room for awhile was and yet will state that GWG should be great NOW instead of ramping up to PSN+ levels. They also forget that PSN+ was shit when it first came out.

AND

Does that mean the PS4 is shit because it's library is garbage now OR do we keep waiting until better games come out?

Lol. I've actually been considering getting a Vita and then common sense kicked in.

(It's still a possibility).