How do you feel about Sony's Acquisition of Gaikai

[dexterlablab1]

This morning, what was once just a rumor has became a reality. Sony has bough Gaikai this morning.

But how do you feel about it? The PS4 is already known to still use physical software. So at best, this might be an added on function to Playstation Plus. With a somewhat lesser version of Gaikai available to the people that don't have Playstation Plus. But that's only my own personal assumption.

What do you guys think?

 

[Sugarhill]

I think that despite the PS player's contention that Sony does it right and doesn't charge for online gaming, the company feels like they missed an obvious pot of gold by NOT charging for online play. I don't think much, if any of Gaikai will be made available to anyone that doesn't have PlayStation Plus because the desire is to get people to buy PS Plus and buy the PS4.

Sony is going to have to stop the business practices that continue to cost them money and this is one of the ways in my opinion.

 

[dexterlablab1]

I think that despite the PS player's contention that Sony does it right and doesn't charge for online gaming, the company feels like they missed an obvious pot of gold by NOT charging for online play. I don't think much, if any of Gaikai will be made available to anyone that doesn't have PlayStation Plus because the desire is to get people to buy PS Plus and buy the PS4.

Sony is going to have to stop the business practices that continue to cost them money and this is one of the ways in my opinion.

It may be a gold mine to charge people, but that damn sure doesn't make it right or acceptable. I'm glad Sony didn't charge people. And I'm happy Nintendo won't be charging for their service either when it comes out.

 

[Sugarhill]

The only reason as to why Sony and Nintendo didn't want to charge is because they are trying to sell over priced consoles. I really don't get why people think they should be able to play on consoles for free and have the level of service that Microsoft provides. I don't mind and think it is more than acceptable to charge for online play.

Today's consumer doesn't believe that they have to pay for anything if it's on the internet and that is ridiculous.

 

[dexterlablab1]

The only reason as to why Sony and Nintendo didn't want to charge is because they are trying to sell over priced consoles. I really don't get why people think they should be able to play on consoles for free and have the level of service that Microsoft provides. I don't mind and think it is more than acceptable to charge for online play.

Today's consumer doesn't believe that they have to pay for anything if it's on the internet and that is ridiculous.

you DO realize for the first two years of the 360 system's life that Live was free to play online right?

And no, neither the PS3 or the Wii were overpriced. The PS3 was a Blu Ray player AND a game system. So a best at launch, you paid $300 for a system and $300 for a Blu ray player. Then you take the Wii, the Wii was cheap BECAUSE it was an SD system. So, you got an SD price for it at the time.

 

[Sugarhill]

Nope. I didn't play anything during the first two years of the 360, but you DO realize that even with the change, more people prefer Live to PSN and no matter the amount of the % put into Live, it's been worth it to all that are playing.

For hardcore gamers that claim it's all about the GAMES, then the Blu Ray on the PS3 was an unnecessary tack on, so therefore it WAS too expensive and a poor decision on Sony's part as they bled money and had no choice but to keep producing PS2s which also cut into their profits as they couldn't get those people to move onto the PS3.

$600 to play games that you know you want and be forced into a movie format that you aren't sure you want? Not good business sense and they realized it quickly.