Gaming

3181 readers

605 users here now

!gaming is a community for gaming noobs through gaming aficionados. Unlike !games, we don’t take ourselves quite as serious. Shitposts and memes are welcome.

Our Rules:

1. Keep it civil.

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only.

2. No sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia or any other flavor of bigotry.

I should not need to explain this one.

3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.

4. Try not to repost anything posted within the past month.

Beyond that, go for it. Not everyone is on every site all the time.

Logo uses joystick by liftarn

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

JonsJava@lemmy.world

onlinepersona@programming.dev

851

It's wild that they get away with charging for it (startrek.website)

submitted 11 months ago by The_Picard_Maneuver@startrek.website to c/gaming@lemmy.world

232 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 11 points 11 months ago (3 children)

Nintendo and Sony's free options were junk. Microsoft mage a product so much better than the free alternatives that people were willing to pay for it.

[–] Cringe2793@lemmy.world 9 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Better than on pc, where it was completely free?

[–] nem@sopuli.xyz 0 points 11 months ago

In many ways, yes. It was , and still is to some degree, massively more convenient for the couch gamers. That is what you pay for.

[–] hark@lemmy.world 8 points 11 months ago

Nintendo's paid option is still garbage.

[–] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

Sony's free options were junk

Not during the PS2 era. FF11, EverQuest Adventures, THPS, MGSO1, Splinter Cell Mercs vs Spies... Quite possibly the best era of online console gaming, IMO.

[–] dejected_warp_core@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

To be fair, didn't all of those have publisher-run infrastructure to make it work? There wasn't a "Sony Online" presence like there was for the PS3 and later.

[–] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

They had DNAS about a year into the life of the online services, which acted as a middleman and DRM. Those were run by Sony themselves.

Even now, don't publishers and developers handle everything for their own servers once the Microsoft or Sony servers pass them off to the game itself? Most of the games I have for PS right now just use bullshit P2P systems; me or some other player are basically hosting the server in those cases, and I still have to pay extra for it.

Also I just thought about how totally F2P games like Rocket League and Fortnite do not actually require the PS+, Nintendo Online or Xbox Gold (or whatever it's called these days) subscription to play.