There is no good reason, even with plenty of advance warning, to require a third party account for a single player game.
PC Gaming
For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki
Rules:
- Be Respectful.
- No Spam or Porn.
- No Advertising.
- No Memes.
- No Tech Support.
- No questions about buying/building computers.
- No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
- No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
- No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
- Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)
Yep. On the older games, and Spider-Man, it was optional but you get cool stuff if you do. Why not keep it optional?
I will absolutely be playing this game.
I will not be purchasing it, however.
Question is, to pirate it now or wait for the lirate version to get some patches too?
I mean, I like to think Sony made it perfectly clear this time around. There's really no excuse this time. People were warning other people, Sony had it on the system requirements sheet, and Steam had it listed as soon as the page went up. So if you still picked up the game and then decided to bitch about the PlayStation Network requirement because you didn't know, that's on you.
Flipside, if you bought the game just to bitch about the PlayStation network requirement, knowing full well this would be a requirement, you're way more privileged than me. When I don't like how someone does something, I typically don't give them money unless I don't have a choice.
Honestly I appreciate them buying it and expressing the disappointment in Steam reviews. It is the best way to get attention to it since people aren't going to refrain from buying it. Boycotts don't work so people expressing their thoughts is the best we got.
"boycotts don't work" lmao
The gaming community is incapable of executing an effective boycott because they cannot go 5 minutes without the thing they like. So they'll pre-order garbage, never learn their lesson, and complain the whole time while paying a premium, instead of exercising restraint and playing something else - like one of their 4,000 unplayed games in their bought library.
Boycotts only work when the group boycotting is large enough to impact the bottom line.
Most gamers just don't care enough about accounts and launchers to boycott a game or company. They just want to come home from work and play games.
Yeah, they left off the rest of that lesson, which is "boycotts don't work if you don't fucking do them". Boycotts work when they happen, and it's still a good thing to personally boycott a game you feel isn't up to your standards even if the broader community isn't, but it's been consistently shown nonetheless that gamers are horrible at wide-scale boycotts.
What do you think I meant by people won't refrain from buying. People not buying products they weren't going to buy anyways isn't a boycott. Do you trust the gaming community to actually not buy something they want?
People are misunderstanding that boycotts won't work in this case means a boycott isn't going to happen.
Steam refunds are easy and convenient. I wouldn't personally bother doing that just to post a "protest review" either, but it's definitely possible to do without losing any money.
This is my exact reaction. The issue with HD2 was the bait and switch of adding the requirement at a later date, particularly since they had already sold copies in places where people literally could not make PSN accounts.
Not that I agree with Sony's decision to require the account for GOW, but at least they're being up front about it this time. If you don't want the account, there are 500 billion other quality games you can buy that don't require one.
Could be people who already have the PSN account. Linking it was never the problem. I don't want the account
One thing that immensely frustrates me about this is we don’t get this reaction from Ubisoft where an account is required to play pretty much all their games. Nor Activision with Call of Duty.
It’s not great that Sony is doing this, but at the same time the horse has already left the barn and people are just jumping on the rage bandwagon.
I’m not saying don’t be mad at Sony, but can we get this outrage at the other companies too?
This is a single player game that wants me to log in. I won't buy something like that, irrespective of what company it's from.
Fair, that’s why I don’t buy anything Ubisoft like Assassin’s Creed.
Those are multiplayer games. Totally different.
People had the same reaction, but it was long enough ago to be forgotten old news.
But this implies same people are also buying those games. Which they might not even be into.
GTA, cod and ubisoft games are polarising.
But there's a massive crowd who likes single player games. Especially ones that are meant to be good.
Call of Duty uses it for crossplay. Totally different.
just fucking pirate it.
I'm all for piracy but the average person has no idea what they're doing and will most likely end up with a bunch of viruses due to lack of experience or people to show them how to pirate safely.
I'm tired of this issue being completely ignored in these situations. Pirating games is even harder than pirating movies or tv shows which is already difficult if you don't know what you're doing. .
Just download the fitgirl repack. It's really is extremely easy.
I like the idea of Kratos being 100% aware of everything and him just being disappointed in IRL people
Are people this mad about Microsoft accounts? I picked up Forza Horizon 4 and couldn't play at all until I signed in with one. However I already had one from using OneDrive.
Rockstar too. Can't even play RDR2 solo without creating an account.
I do hate Sony extra because they're the fuckwits behind some particularly stupid DRM schemes. But some of the games they've been publishing lately are good and very welcome on PC aside from this account crap.
Did it count as being mad, that I just don't play any games that require linking accounts? There's plenty of games that don't require it that I can pay, and missing out on some high budget good games that everyone is talking about isn't a big enough deal to me that I will be fine with just skipping it.
Nah, IMO that's pretty reasonable. I would say "mad" here means someone bought the game and then gave it a negative review over the account linking.
Both games mentioned have multiplayer sections within them
It would be better if you didn't have to sign in until you chose to play MP, but to a degree it is somewhat understandable to have you log into a game with MP
This game annoyed me. The first was so so good and the second felt like two games rushed and crammed into one for the sake of ending the Nordic story, so Kratos can move on to another Pantheon
How can this surprise people... i removed it from my wishlist last time it was on sale, not because i dont want it, but because Sony is behind it.