Uncharted 3: Drake's Deception™ Single Player and Xcom The Unknown Enemy Free for PSN+ Members.
If you’re a PlayStation®Plus member, you can download this exclusive item at no extra cost and it’s yours to keep until your subscription ends.
Thats 2 free games easily covering the $70 annual membership fee in one hit.
Have fun!
Thanx
*PS Plus not PSN +/Plus
Nah, that's not the PS plus, it's XBL, quite different.
same in that it requires a subscription too?
Free games from PS Plus was always a regular thing, free games from XBox Live wasn't. I think that was warranted if only to notify people of the upcoming freebies.
Not "Free". Ps+ is a paid subscription.
PS+ is a great deal but not a bargain sorry
2 games covering the membership makes it a bargain. Besides I put it in Gaming not freebie, but thanx anyway.
Dont get me wrong PS+ is a good deal but users get new content every month. You didnt mark it as freebie but you used the word FREE in the title. It would be similar to posted a bargain everytime a new album is added to spotify. This belongs in the forum, but thanks for the update :-)
PS+ subscription gets you a minimum of 65 games per year so it's not $70 for 2 games, but $70 for 65 games… but this has all been discussed before.
But the games aren't yours to keep, so if you decide not to re-subscribe after 5 years youve spent $350 (5x~$70) and you literally lose access to every single "free" game that you got over those 5 years.
Personally I don't consider that a bargain. It's a rental service where you don't even get to choose what games you're renting. Imagine paying blockbuster $70 a year for "free" games, walking in to get your games and they say "here you go, these are your free games. bring them back when you stop paying" and they hand you 2 three year old games that didn't review very well.
@CyberGenesys: saying 65 games per year is VERY misleading. You get about 24 PS3 games, many of which anyone who is a genuine video game fan would've already owned/played since they're so old, 12 PSN games (which are hit and miss), 24 Vita games (good for the 8 people in Australia that actually bought a Vita) which means you need to pony up big $$ for an overpriced proprietary Vita Memory card in order to use.
5 years youve spent $350 (5x~$70) and you literally lose access to every single "free" game
I'm going to dig up an old comment to reply to this:
http://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/98732#comment-1321517
http://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/98732#comment-1320388
Subscription can cost as little as $55 (during sales) and even less if you pay by Playstation card which you also bought on sale.
saying 65 games per year is VERY misleading
24+24+12 = 60, hardly misleading since it does not include the 3 games mentioned as part of this deal, and any other freebies Sony might decide on.
old games
Hitman: Absolution was available to PS+ subscribers less than 4 months after the game was released. If you think the games content doesn't review very well, perhaps you should recheck your reviews for the current lineup…
Playstation 4 is also confirmed to receive PS+ at NO extra cost, will that supply your dose of new games?
you don't even get to choose what games you're renting
Sure I don't get to choose the games, but if someone hands me a game and says "give me a dollar and you can play this for year" then yes, I will give them a dollar, and tbh, I might not play it. So yes, if block buster did that (and delivered) then sure.
24 Vita games (good for the 8 people in Australia that actually bought a Vita)
I have one, and have never* bought a game for it and still have more games than I have time to play.
overpriced proprietary Vita Memory card
…I agree :(
*I lied, I did buy Ridge Racer, but I'm trying to erase that crapness from memory :(
Playstation 4 is also confirmed to receive PS+ at NO extra cost,
Whoops, that's the wrong way round
PS+ is also confirmed to receive Playstation 4 content at NO extra cost, and considering it will be required for online gaming on the Playstation 4….
I'm going to dig up an old comment to reply to this:
in that you say "I don't think there is a single cost vs. benefit comparison where a PS+ subscription doesn't win.". I disagree. I buy 20+ games a year, never sell/return any of them. In 5 years I still have those games, no extra cost. To keep my PS+ games I would have to continue paying for as long as I live. PS+ loses.
24+24+12 = 60, hardly misleading since it does not include the 3 games mentioned as part of this deal, and any other freebies Sony might decide on.
It's still misleading, as if you don't have a Vita you don't get 24 of those. You also very likely will get games that you already bought included in those remaining 36 games.
I don't want to have to pay money continually until the end of time to play games, so PS+ is an absolute waste to me. If you want to play any of the big games you still need to buy them, as they won't be on PS+ for 6+ months IF they ever are. So you're buying games AND paying ~$70 a year in the hope that you'll like the games that they decide you can play for as long as you keep paying. Doesn't sound like a good deal to me at all.
If you're poor, sure, I can see its benefits. But if you're poor, why are you partaking in one of the most expensive hobbies around?
PS+ is also confirmed to receive Playstation 4 content at NO extra cost, and considering it will be required for online gaming on the Playstation 4….
Yeah but you won't be getting any full retail PS4 games for a while. The DriveClub PS+ edition is basically a demo - you get a small handful of cars/tracks, that's it. You're crazy if you think they'll be giving you retail PS4 games in at least the first 6-12 months.
I honestly expect the Instant Game Collection deal to wrap up within the first 12 months of the PS4s release. Why? When it started it was a value adding benefit, making people see PS+ as worth paying for. Now that online multiplayer is behind PS+, suddenly PS+ is necessary for most people - so Sony don't need to entice people to subscribe. Before it was optional, so they had to sweeten the deal, now it's basically mandatory. People will pay for it regardless, so there's no need for them to give you game rentals too.
saying 65 games per year is VERY misleading. You get about 24 PS3 games
We got 54 games to play on PS3 last year.
See my spreadsheet that tracks the "free" games we and the US get.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AmRRDLosxQLIdGJ…
@MrFunSocks
If you're poor, sure, I can see its benefits.
Poor, far from it, time poor, 100%.
That is why I got PS+ to start with.
I simply wanted it for the auto download feature.
Nice to know I don’t lose time waiting for patches and updates to be downloaded because they have already happened.
The games are simply a bonus to me. I no longer purchase games straight away unless they are MP games where there is a community that strengthens the MP gaming.
I purchased Uncharted 3 when it came out, still yet to play it. Just traded it in last week when it was announced as a “free” game.
Do not feed the troll Snuke. He's one of about 8 people in Australia without the intelligence to see the benefits of PS Plus. Using poorness as an argument is retarded, PS Plus is worth it for me for the auto uploads/updates and the exclusive discounts alone. Having a massive downloadable library at my beck and call easily outweighs that dumb Blockbusters excuse, I don't believe Blockbusters would let you keep a game for 12 months and only charge you $70 per year, there's also stock issues (do they even have the game when you want it?) and expenses of retrieving it if they do.
Looking at your list though, again, it's very misleading. You might count 54 PS3 games, but actually only 32 of those are RETAIL PS3 games. So less than HALF of your quoted 65 games were actually full retail PS3 games.
32 retail PS3 games.
15 Vita games.
24 PSN games or PS2 HD re-releases.
Again - very misleading.
Like I said - if you never buy games and are happy to just go with what they give you to play, I see the merit in it. But for anyone who's not just a "casual" gamer, it's just not worth it IMO.
Making PS+ virtually mandatory has put a damper on the PS4 for me. I will be buying both the Xbox One and PS4, and I will continue to subscribe to XBox Live because all my friends are on it and the Xbox exclusives are where I spend the majority of my online play time, but I won't pay for PS+ as my PS3 is a PlayTV box basically, with maybe 2-3 PS3 exclusive games per year. I'm not paying for PS+ just to be able to play those 2-3 games online.
@beakeroo: not trolling at all. I don't see value in rental services, which is what PS+ is. At the end of the day I want to OWN the games I'm playing. I wouldn't pay $70 to maybe play some games that interest me for 12 months - I see no value in that.
Looking at your list though, again, it's very misleading. You might count 54 PS3 games, but actually only 32 of those are RETAIL PS3 games. So less than HALF of your quoted 65 games were actually full retail PS3 games.
Careful, you are mixing people, I never said 65 games, and know one ever said the games had to be “retail games”
As to that figure of 65, that was CyberGenesys , and he did not specifically say what type of games they were. You simply chose to focus on PS3, as no doubt that is of most relevant to you.
Here is what Sony said “we are committed to delivering over 45 games to you as part of your subscription before June 2013”
And they have delivered on that promise and more. So not misleading, you are simply misinterpreting
not trolling at all. I don't see value in rental services, which is what PS+ is. At the end of the day I want to OWN the games I'm playing. I wouldn't pay $70 to maybe play some games that interest me for 12 months - I see no value in that.
Your view and you are completely entitled to that.
As I said, it is not about the games for me, they are a bonus, but is seems to be your only focus.
You see no value, many many others feel it is excellent value.
As to that figure of 65, that was CyberGenesys , and he did not specifically say what type of games they were. You simply chose to focus on PS3, as no doubt that is of most relevant to you.
So do you see how saying "65 free games!" is very misleading? It's 65 "free" games……..if you have a Vita, and a PS3…. and then over 50% of the overall titles aren't even retail games. Next they'll be giving you free android-style apps for the Vita and some people will still try and pass them off as awesome value. I've already seen people claim the Playstation Suite Android games as exclusives in their list wars lol.
Then again most of the staunchly pro PS+ crowd still refer to them as free games, despite the fact that they actually pay for them lol. Semantics don't matter to them. "Free games! All I have to do is pay for them and I get them for free!"
As I said, it is not about the games for me, they are a bonus, but is seems to be your only focus.
Let's get serious here - the "free" games are the only focus for the majority of people. You think many people would pay $70 a year just to have their PS3 turn on at midnight and download a patch once a month?
I think that PS+ is without a doubt amazing value. I'm offended you refer to people who see the merit in this "casual" gamers.
..your trolling
Regardless you made your opinion clear, move on
So do you see how saying "65 free games!" is very misleading?
No, not even remotely.
If I had a Vita, I would do exactly as I did in regards to PS3, read the actual detail to see how it is relevant to me, and not assume that all of that is about me.
Let's get serious here - the "free" games are the only focus for the majority of people
Agree. But I am not trying to back my view by pigeon holing an entire user group.
I am simply trying to make you understand that there are far more possible uses than the single view you have.
PS+ is NOT just about "free" games.
Nobody said "65 free games", the very first link I provided clearly said
This subscription is between $54-$70 per year and gives you access to the following:
Which according to snuke's list is actually an underestimate as it seems 73 games were made available, of which 54 were playable on PS3 (of which <insert number here> are considered "retail"). What's the obsession with "retail" games? Some of the best games out there are not "retail"; Thomas Was Alone, Limbo etc.
I agree, I think PS Plus is awesome, I play a fair bit more than casual. I'd like to compare trophy levels with him and see who is considered casual, lol.
I've got a 60k+ gamerscore on 360, and that's without actively playing for achievements. If I get them I get them, if not I'm not fussed.
Level 7 with ~350 trophies on PS3, again, never gone out of my way to get a trophy, and I only play PS3 exclusives on the PS3.
Have bought 2xPS3s (launch 60gb and Slim after YLOD), 2x360s (launch 20gb and Arcade after RROD), and will be buying a PS4 and Xbox One on launch day. Own basically every console from every generation since the Master System, have bought 200+ retail games per generation since (including) the original Playstation.
If you're trying to start "who's a casual gamer" argument with me, you're not going to win.
Actually Mr.CasualSocks, you're wrong, lol
https://www.playfire.com/beakeroo
Click it and weep, I haven't played a 360 in a year or so, not actively for 2 years or more.
In case you have trouble clicking 52k Xbox (which is a shit score I know, I have friends who have 160k+) Level 20 PSN (never started PSN until I basically finished on Xbox)
I'm not a trophy whore, I only really try on games I like (mostly exclusives) and games I play over and over with the kids (like Lego)
I've got a Steam account that I'm just starting to make use of and I also play a lot of 3DS XL recently. You're not as hardcore as you think you are mate and Plus isn't just for casual players.
Now put you're little e-weiner away and lets end this pissing match eh? (with me the victor of course) Now if you'd like to neg my post and sulk for the rest of the day I quite understand ;)
How did this descend into a pissing contest?
Stop down voting all of Socks's comments just because he made one.
Playfire, I had forgotten all about that site.
https://www.playfire.com/M8NTIS
So I've got a significantly higher gamerscore than you, and have played more games.
Like I said, I only play exclusives on the PS3. You've played the same games across multiple platforms. Think I've only bought 2 PS3 games in the last 2+ years (God of War Ascension and Journey), soon to add Last of Us, sonys first party games in general just haven't appealed to me this generation.
You don't look like a "casual" gamer at all, good for you. To suggest I am though is stupid.
I still stand by the statement that a "core" (hate that term) gamer generally would see very little value in PS+ as any of the decent games that come to the IGC they would have already played months earlier.
And like I said - I own nearly every console since and including the Master System (and some before, Atari for example, which is what I grew up on), handhelds included (3DS/Vita/PSP/GBA/GBC/GB/Lynx/GG/etc). If that makes me "casual" then I guess there are no "hardcores".
Its a good site and I haven't been downvoting his posts until I saw a trend of when he replied, I got negged.
The pissing contest came from his tude, categorizing Plus users as casual is narrow minded.
Significantly? 8k and I don't even own a 360 any longer? Do you realise how many trophies it takes to get to lvl 20 on PSN? (3500 more than it took you to get to level 7) Regardless, you get the message, Plus is a service for gamers. Fair enough, you're happier to pay a similar price to MS for f*** all.
Also having a pile of consoles means nothing other than you're either a hoarder or a collector.
Also having a pile of consoles means nothing other than you're either a hoarder or a collector.
And you wouldn't call a collector a "casual" would you? ;) A collector is the exact opposite of someone who does it casually haha.
Plus is a gimped rental service, gimped because you don't get to choose the games you rent. Feel free to enjoy it, but don't pretend it's more than it is.
Also, trophies dont work like you suggest - Trophy Level isn't based on the number of trophies. 3500 bronze trophies might equal <1000 gold trophies.
I'm happy to pay MS for a better more robust online system. I also pay it because I have to if I want to play games online on the console I use the most.
Sorry but you're intentionally ignoring the other benefits of Plus yet again. I won't repeat them as we'll go round and round.
I know plenty of collectors who are only casual gamers btw.
As for trophies value, are you saying now that you have 350 gold or platinum trophies? Otherwise your point is rather lost on me.
Oh right I forgot, having your PS3 turn on and download a patch or 2 every other month is reason to pay $70 a year lol.
Trophies have points based on their level;
How many points are each trophy worth?
Bronze: 15
Silver: 30
Gold: 90
Platinum: 180
How many points does it take to get to each level?
Level 2 is at 200 Points
Level 3 is at 600 Points
Level 4 is at 1200 Points
Level 5 is at 2400 Points
Level 6 is at 4000 Points
After that is rises by 2000 for each level till level 12 at 16000 points. At level 13 it goes to 24000 and it increases by 8000 with each succeeding level.
level 20 is 80k points
My understanding is that it's directly comparable to Gamerscore.
I wouldn't use trophies or gamerscore as a metric. I've spent 300+ hours playing MAG and 120+ hours on RE5, I would say that makes me hardcore, but its still only ~80 trophies.
Plus is a gimped rental service
No, it's a digital subscription service. And like any subscription service, you don't get to choose what you get. The fact that it's digital just means they have more power over the licencing hence, stop paying = stop playing. Stop comparing it to renting, it's apples & oranges.
I don't know about Xbox live being more robust, I literally owned an Xbox for 3 days before rage-returning it. I could not stand it's restrictions.
You pay $50 per year and can play games online, I pay $54 per year and can play online plus I get a bunch of games I can play if I want to (+other features). That's really the crux of it, the rest is just preference of one system over another, and each to their own.
Paying money just to access the internet (on top of costs of having the internet) seems just as bad as playing games you don't even own… (sarcasm)
So that would put me on 132k vs 66k. Yeah, he's casual in comparison. I don't consider myself hardcore as I said earlier, I've got friends with 160k+ and that's only on Xbox.
Also I agree CyberGenesis, I have played the heck outta the CoD, BF, MoH, Killzone games online. Usually prestiging at least 6 or 7 times and have hardly any trophies to show for them as I don't play the campaigns, I just get them to play with the WP crowd.
Also he plays PS3 casually and so because he doesn't use it any more than every couple of months (when he has to download a patch) he believes that Plus is only for poor and casual users.
I won't bother responding any longer, he's trolling imo.
I don't know about Xbox live being more robust, I literally owned an Xbox for 3 days before rage-returning it. I could not stand it's restrictions.
What restrictions? You mean paying for Gold? Guess you won't be buying a PS4 then either?
You pay $50 per year and can play games online, I pay $54 per year and can play online plus I get a bunch of games I can play if I want to (+other features).
I also have cross-game voice chat, party chat, cross-game invites, much faster downloads (both consoles next to each other, both wired to router), and far less downtime. There's also the whole PSN hack thing.
What restrictions? You mean paying for Gold? Guess you won't be buying a PS4 then either?
Restrictions in the device itself; HDD upgrade, usb support, media playback/streaming etc Why would I not get a PS4? I'm already a PS+ subscriber so it won't cost me any more in monthly fees… And because I intend on getting a PS4, I may as well be a subscriber now and get access to the games for the PS3/Vita.
cross-game voice chat, party chat, cross-game invites
Cross-game voice chat, When I'm playing a game, I want to talk to the people I'm actually playing with not some other person playing 'Just Dance: DubStep Edition'. Party chat, already have it. Cross-game invites, I guess that's a feature that is important to some and worth paying for… just like automatic downloads :P
much faster downloads
I don't see the downloads because they automatically happen overnight, so care factor = zero
There's also the whole PSN hack thing.
I scored 4 games from that, I wish it would get hacked more often ;)
usb support
What exactly do you mean by this?
media playback/streaming
The 360 is a MUCH better media streamer than the PS3, mainly because it caches your library and updates every time you connect to it whereas the PS3 has to load A->Z every time you turn it on. When you have terabytes of videos, watching a video that starts with "Z" on the PS3 can take a while to even get to. Both seem to have about the same file compatibility. I've had files work on 360 but not PS3, then others that work on PS3 but not 360.
Party chat, already have it.
Text party chat….lol
I don't see the downloads because they automatically happen overnight, so care factor = zero
So if you buy a PSN game or DLC at 5pm you turn your PS3 off, then back on when you go to bed, and let it download overnight? I'm talking about actual download speeds of content, not patching. I can get a 1GB file off Live in 10 minutes, but the same size file might take 20 minutes off PSN.
usb support
At the time save game backup and pretty much anything required the usb drive to be formatted to magical xbox format.
media playback
I bought a Bluray movie to watch… oh :P
I don't know, this was about 5 years ago. All I remember was thinking "wow, where are all the options? Why are there no settings for this? Really? I have to format the drive? And I cant copy MP3's form the memory stick to the internal storage? Extra codec packs to play standard videos? Why would I not just use a PC then?" etc
Text party chat…lol
Voice/Video chat, oh you don't have that because you're not a PS+ subscriber.
I'm talking about actual download speeds of content, not patching
I buy games through the Sony Web Store. When I checkout I 'Send to device X', the console, when it powers on automatically at whatever early morning time its set to, starts the download of games, patches, whatever and at the same time uploads my save games and stats.
Awesome. I was hoping Uncharted 3 would be coming to PSN+.
Not sure why this is a bargain. They have games included with ps+ membership every month
Dupe
here is the link, so if you consider this a bargain, at least its a dupe
http://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/106849#comment-1448042
OP also left off the third free game, Little Big Planet Karting ;)
Side note, for those who missed the post, here is an example of actual SEN (& permanent?) free games (no subscription required);
You missed the * on "Uncharted 3 MP".
*you can play up to level 15, then progression stops unless you pay.
In fact, all 3 of those games are extremely stifled unless you spend money on them. Theyre "Free-To-Play" games, not "Free games".
Fair point, I was unaware of the level cap. And yes, they are free2play & pay2win games.
Its an excellent subscription service, not a bargain.
edit: nvr mind.
Definitely belongs on the forums, not really a bargain.
PS+ Lover here.
This has been discussed multiple times.
The games in PS+ are NOT a bargain unti themselves, free games is the norm, every month without fail..
If there is a deal on the price of PS+ then that is a bargain.
Really , posting PS plus free games !!!
*PSN+ members, not PSN members.