Playstation Plus Instant Game Collection. One year later....

Harry Bizzle wrote:Plus is why I'm going to buy a console that launched in 2007 at like £130. Just to put that in perspective a Wii U at £144 still wasn't low enough for me to bite.

I don't think PS+ is the reason that a PS3 would be considered by many to be a better buy than a Wii U even when the PS3 is only slightly cheaper.

I don't think even the most hardened Nintendo fan would argue that the Wii Us current games catalogue compares in any way to what you can get on PS3. Or 360 for that matter.

I'm a hardened Nintendo fan and I'm disappointed with the Wii U titles available now.

HSH28 wrote:
Harry Bizzle wrote:I read the other day that the 360 thing is only until the end of the year, which makes it even more of a joke. They're only giving 13 games and they start with old as hell ones.

I also think this is a bit ridiculous. Rubbishing MS for giving us free games is nonsense, I wouldn't call Fable 3/Halo 3 and AC2 'old as hell' either.

Its not the same as the PS+ thing and it shouldn't be in here really. Free games are free games, laughing at it because there aren't as many and the ones we know about are older than the stuff on PS+ doesn't make much sense. We don't know where MS might go with it after the Xbox One launches either, at the moment its just for this year, but so what?

While I will give Microsoft credit for not attaching strings to the deal and genuinely giving away free games, Halo 3 is on the borderline of being a retro game.

Delusibeta wrote:While I will give Microsoft credit for not attaching strings to the deal and genuinely giving away free games, Halo 3 is on the borderline of being a retro game.

What a complete load of bollocks. Either you don't know what 'retro' means or you are just trolling.

What we should expect from you though I guess.

I'm sure there are a lot of Xbox owners excited at the though of a chance to play a 6 year old Halo game. One that's slipped under the radar for many.

Its not quite 6 years old. And yeah I'm sure there are a few 360 owners that either missed it or had gotten rid of it and wouldn't mind playing it again.

Either way it is not 'retro'.

There have been 3 more Halo games since its release, with another one on the way. It's definitely getting there.

Personally speaking, if its five years old or more, it's a retro game. Normally, that would be about the length of a console generation, so it works out. This new gen is three years late, however.

Any game after '98 can't be called retro.

Calling a game released in 2007 a retro game is an utter joke.

There is no need to be upset.

Calling a current gen game retro is ridiculous.

If you can have a retrospective review of something in the context of follow-up releases then the argument is there to be made. This generation has gone on exceptionally long, and as such, sticking to some arbitrary year to define what is and isn't retro is the ridiculous notion here.

Something Fishy

Buffalo wrote:Calling a current gen game retro is ridiculous.

Yeah I can't see how that label can apply.

I don't even think of last gen classics as retro. Retro takes me back to the 16 bit era.

It's not a sustainable service. The games will run out, then what will you do?

I do actually see it as sort of an extended rental service to be honest, but the Playstation Plus concept is going to run and run - so if I fancy Deus Ex: HR in, like, 4 years time it'll be there on my HDD.
You could say it's digital distribution done 'right'.

HSH28 wrote:Any game after '98 can't be called retro.

Moggy wrote:
HSH28 wrote:Any game after '98 can't be called retro.

So that is sorted then. Anything released after the France World Cup isn't retro. Anything released after Frank Sinatra died isn't retro. Anything released after Babe: Pig in the City isn't retro.

Parksey wrote:
Moggy wrote:
HSH28 wrote:Any game after '98 can't be called retro.

:lol:

So that is sorted then. Anything released after the France World Cup isn't retro. Anything released after Frank Sinatra died isn't retro. Anything released after Babe: Pig in the City isn't retro.

Sounds about right. I'm just about willing to accept Super Mario 64 could be considered retro now, but stuff much after that? No way.

So early N64 perhaps, but anything Dreamcast onwards, not on your life.

HSH28 wrote:
Parksey wrote:
Moggy wrote:
HSH28 wrote:Any game after '98 can't be called retro.

So that is sorted then. Anything released after the France World Cup isn't retro. Anything released after Frank Sinatra died isn't retro. Anything released after Babe: Pig in the City isn't retro.

Sounds about right. I'm just about willing to accept Super Mario 64 could be considered retro now, but stuff much after that? No way.

So early N64 perhaps, but anything Dreamcast onwards, not on your life.

You better tell Retrogamer that.

http://www.retrogamer.net/games_search. ... ch&cat=420

:lol:

Suppose they have to push that kind of thing in order to have stuff to fit in the magazine.

Don't think even they'd try to argue Halo 3 is a retro game though.

Playstation Plus Instant Game Collection. One year later....

Who is online

Affiliates