Was PlayStation Plus a Trojan Horse?

Posted on Nov 4 2014 - 4:00pm by Shak

playstation-plusWhen the PlayStation Plus service launched, it didn’t have much going for it. The service was only available on the PS3, and had relatively basic games on offer. These offerings slowly improved over time, but the biggest and strongest weapon in Sony’s arsenal came during E3 2012, in which they announced the Instant Games Collection. A collection of 10 well-reviewed big titles, of which 3 would be rotated every few months. In addition to this there would also be other offers as well.

This all changed earlier this year. Now there are no evergreen titles, and no criteria for the titles that are put on offer, meaning one month you can get a good selection of games and other months you’ll get a collection of smaller games. So was the initial offer of big blockbuster titles on the service a Trojan Horse?

Some may call it a bait and switch, but either way, Sony promised one thing and then gave another after a relatively short period of time. Meaning those that subscribed at the start of this offer got good value for money, but those that subscribed for the hope that the offer would continue have been deceived slightly. Although you are now offered 6 games across all three platforms each month, you’re not always guaranteed to get a big blockbuster title as part of the service.

PlayStation Plus is still a good service, but it’s looking less and less worth it by the month. The only saving grace at the moment are the brand new indie games on the service, but PlayStation Plus started off offering game similar to this when it was first launched, and only hit its stride when larger disc-based games were added to the service. Perhaps now that you have to pay for the service for PS4 online multiplayer means that Sony has already begun to get rid of the other benefits of PlayStation Plus? After all, why offer games that are 6 months old on your service, when the competitor is offering games that are 2, 3 or more years old for probably far far cheaper?