@Ansem_Rev: For me it depends on the game. I've seen some games at 30 that look choppy and others that look smooth. Sometimes it's just a matter of adjusting. If I go from a 60 fps game to one at 30 it's a noticeable difference intially but once my eyes adjust it's not an issue.

One of my favorite series as a kid. Glad to see it finally received a modern make over.

@Dizzy1976: but you can make a Friend's type show without calling it Friends. Seems like an unnecessary reboot.

@Atzenkiller: " If you really think that anyone really cares about these free games and thinks that it's "money well spent", then why not suggest to Sony to get rid of the PS+ requirement for online play and see how many people will still keep paying for it?"

But you are the one complaining about the quality of the games that are offered.....

The value or worth of the membership boils down to how much you utilize the features offered by the subscription. You claim in another post that you feel like you are being ripped off and, based on your comments, your reasoning seems to be based on the "free" games.

So I ask why is it that you are paying for the service? Are you paying mainly to play online? Do you pay hoping for quality "free" games? Do you utilize the extra discounts on sales? The main reason for getting the membership should be playing online first and foremost. If you don't utilize that component of the subscription then you are basically ripping yourself off for paying for something that you don't use.

@CyberEarth: thing is, with Bloodborne, it's a PlayStation exclusive so probably easier to offer the game for "free".

Witcher 3 would be a good candidate but I'd be surprised to see that offered. I don't know if I've ever seen Plus or Gold offer a game of that quality and size (well I remember Witcher 2 being offered but I think it was after the XboxOne released).

I don't think I've ever seen GTA V on sale for cheaper than $30, maybe $25 on black friday, which tells me the game still sells well for Rockstar. The only way I see them offering the game for free is if it's used to promote a new GTA game.

@CyberEarth: I don't even mind if it's a game I already own since it gives me an excuse to trade in the physical copy and "own" the game digitally.

@Atzenkiller: You have a point if you are talking about people getting PS+ strictly for the "free" games. But I would think most people utilize PS+ for multiple purposes (free games, online gaming, online storage, extra discounts, etc) making the money spent well worth it.

@genji_shimada: I'm not sure what you are expecting for titles. Bloodborne (one of the highest rated games this gen) and Ratchet and Clank this month, Mad Max next month. They are older and maybe not the highest rated games but these are still quality titles for "free." Do you think they're going to be giving us something like Witcher 3 and GTA V?

You also have to consider that it's not entirely up to Sony. Companies need to allow their games to be offered (which I think requires Sony paying a fee) and companies aren't going to allow their games to be offered if the games are still selling fairly well.

@attirex: I'd like to see an article written on this exact subject. The videogame industry's over reliance on sequels and the fear over change. You either get Far Cry 5 type situation where there are no major changes or improvements OR you get new God of War type overhaul. And either way fans will be divided.

Then there is the other side with the risk of making brand IPs. We've seen it happen with numerous games this gen. A new IP is announced and people are expecting the next big game/franchise and the game fails to live up to the hype and potential (Watchdogs, Destiny, No Man's Sky, Sea of Thieves, The Division, etc). Some of these games ended up still doing well commercially but received bad to mixed receptions upon release.

I fear we are getting to a point in gaming where we are going to see little to no innovation and chance taking and, instead, developers and publishers opting to stick to what seems to be working.

@WCK619: unfortunately it's nearly impossible to not offend people these days. The announcement alone offended people because they jumped to conclusions and assumptions about what type of political statements they game was trying to make. Wouldn't be surprised if they saw some of the negativity and made changes to avoid further controversy.