PDA

View Full Version : Will For honor multiplayer require a ps plus membership in order to be played?



Thodoras10
04-30-2016, 02:48 PM
I have been out of this forum for a couple of months so i may have missed this but is the PS4 version of the game going to require PS Plus membership in order to play multiplayer? If it does that's too bad cause most of this game is going to be set more around multiplayer rather than a singleplayer campaign or even split-screen gameplay.

Dead1y-Derri
04-30-2016, 03:36 PM
I have been out of this forum for a couple of months so i may have missed this but is the PS4 version of the game going to require PS Plus membership in order to play multiplayer? If it does that's too bad cause most of this game is going to be set more around multiplayer rather than a singleplayer campaign or even split-screen gameplay.

Unless Sony change their T&Cs around online gaming I think they'll have to obey the PS+ subscription model. Unfortunately its not up to the developers or publisher to really chose. The only games that don't require PS+ are free to play games and I think some only online games but even then those are few and far between and that's set out within Sony's rules.

It'll be the same with Xbox.

As for the game being set around MP that doesn't really have anything to do with it because if we think about other titles that have a focus on MP such as Call of Duty that too requires a PS+ subscription.

Thodoras10
04-30-2016, 05:07 PM
Call of duty is more bareable in singleplayer rather than multiplayer, For honor's first gameplay release was purely multiplayer, while every single call of duty's first gameplay release was singleplayer and that's gotta mean something right? My point is that if For honor needs an additional 20 euros or dollars every 3 months in order to have the other 70% of the game at your disposal, then i really don't know if you guys should focus For honor in multiplayer.

premiumart
04-30-2016, 08:37 PM
First of all ps plus is required for almost every multiplayer game on ps except ones that actually have their own subscription service.

You may be right that the first call of duty trailers and reveals usually are single player trailers, they focus more on the story to be more cinematic. After these trailers gave the setting away litterally all COD fans are waiting for is the multiplayer gameplay trailer reveal.

I dont want to sound rude here but if you actually think that a big percentage buys COD for the story or single player part, you must be mistaken. I mean there are people who have played hours of like every COD mp and have never once played the story mode at all.

Also focusing on MP is one easy way to create more revenue for less content. Like GTA online for example, even though GTA Vs single player is great and full of content the online mode is where the real money comes from. Im not saying that MP is just good for publishers making more money, MP usually is enjoyed for longer by a bigger audience then SP because the experince of actually competing with real human players can vary drastically, its never "really" the same sure some mechanics can get old after a set time.

So here is what i think about For Honor being more about the MP experience:

1. The art of battle system. Sure there could be AI for this kind of gameplay like in other games like mount and blade or kingdom come deliverance BUT actually testing your skill against real players is way more thrilling to me.

2. I have to be honest here, i think that the For Honor SP wont have much in the sense of replayabilty it will probably be like your typical action game story mode, im not saying thats a bad thing i will play the SP for sure. Its just that if you have seen the credits once you are basicly done. Its not like its gonna be a witcher or elder scrolls. At least thats what i think.

3. ( not really a actual argument but my very own opinion) MP is fun. XD

(I was also concerned when i had to buy ps plus when i only had one game with MP but thats not a problem anymore XD having titles like For Honor, the Division and Overwatch. I mean sure it kinda sucks to have to pay a subscription for something ps players got for free in the past but the fun in MP is kinda worth it also there is literally nothing we can do about it well except buying a gaming pc maybe XD)

Thodoras10
05-02-2016, 12:38 AM
I never said that most call of duty players like to play singleplayer, so i can't be mistaken in something i never said :D, i said that call of duty is surely bareable in singleplayer i mean you have stuff to do, achievements to get people to kill again, ways to finish missions differently etc etc and you can make your moves more cinematic as you said while in the case of for honor it won't be like that.

Now i know that many games require a ps plus subscription BUT if you have to pay like 90 euros in total which is like 100 $ for a 3 month long gameplay then i don't think that there should be THAT much focus in multiplayer, and that the team should also focus a lot in singleplayer.

premiumart
05-02-2016, 12:04 PM
I never said that most call of duty players like to play singleplayer, so i can't be mistaken in something i never said :D, i said that call of duty is surely bareable in singleplayer i mean you have stuff to do, achievements to get people to kill again, ways to finish missions differently etc etc and you can make your moves more cinematic as you said while in the case of for honor it won't be like that.

Now i know that many games require a ps plus subscription BUT if you have to pay like 90 euros in total which is like 100 $ for a 3 month long gameplay then i don't think that there should be THAT much focus in multiplayer, and that the team should also focus a lot in singleplayer.

Bearable is a interesting word you use for something that is supposed to be fun XD. I can see where you are comming from but this is the world we live in now, i guess. I mean not only will you have to pay for your ps plus subscription to get the most out of for honor there will probably also be exciting DLC like armor colors and swords skins and stuff yay;)

Revan92000
05-02-2016, 06:43 PM
Call of duty is more bareable in singleplayer rather than multiplayer, For honor's first gameplay release was purely multiplayer, while every single call of duty's first gameplay release was singleplayer and that's gotta mean something right? My point is that if For honor needs an additional 20 euros or dollars every 3 months in order to have the other 70% of the game at your disposal, then i really don't know if you guys should focus For honor in multiplayer.

Battlefront, Destiny, Elder Scrolls Online, Rainbow Six Siege, and The Division are all mainly multiplayer games, and they all require PS+/XB Live for a large number of features.

Bottom line - this game is going to require it too.

Blury21
02-19-2017, 06:25 PM
Unless Sony change their T&Cs around online gaming I think they'll have to obey the PS+ subscription model. Unfortunately its not up to the developers or publisher to really chose. The only games that don't require PS+ are free to play games and I think some only online games but even then those are few and far between and that's set out within Sony's rules.

It'll be the same with Xbox.

As for the game being set around MP that doesn't really have anything to do with it because if we think about other titles that have a focus on MP such as Call of Duty that too requires a PS+ subscription.plzzzzzzz

do you need ps plus to play singleplayer and multiplayer with bots?