Sony Considering Charging for PSN

[Guest]

Seems to me that everyone want to capitalize on the online Biz - I belive that the PSN free has always been the big pitch vs XBL. The way things are looking OnLive.com might be putting PS3 and Xbox in check!

 

[chriskrum]

[citation][nom]itadakimasu[/nom]100% true.I don't have any 360 games because I don't want to have to pay $15 a month or more to maybe or maybe not play online. I only play online once or twice a week, if that... but i still want to be able to if I want to.[/citation]

Where do you get 15 dollars a month? Amazon periodically sells one year subscription cards for xbox live for 30 dollars.

 

[alextheblue]

[citation][nom]IBOOMER[/nom]Been a while since you have seen XBOX Live subscriptions prices has it? Monthly it is $7.99 US, and $50 per year if you pay it up front. That is chump change for the amount of stuff that is provided via the XBL Gold package.[/citation]You can often can get it for even less. Dell (of all companies) had the 12 month gold card on sale a while back for $32.99 w/ free shipping. I snagged one before they sold out. That's only $2.75 a month.

Walmart.com does have it for $40 though. Not bad. Free shipping to a local store too, if you trust them to not lose it or something.

http/www.walmart.com/ip/Xbox-12-Month-Gold-Card/11070919

 

[xonda]

Well, I think Im going back to my old game rig and play free Americas Army.

 

[flea420]

Remove the download cap for one. A 700meg demo shouldn't take a half hour on a 20meg connection. Oh and enough with the horribad game server setups (cod mw2 for example)

They fix those, neat, I still wouldn't pay

 

[climber]

Full HD movie rental or HD TV show download. Perhaps an instant messenger client with camming? or a multi cam chat room, pub like atmosphere... like stickam or userplain.

 

[JohnnyLucky]

I do not play games online so it really doesn't make any difference to me.

 

[shadowkazama]

[citation][nom]flea420[/nom]Remove the download cap for one. A 700meg demo shouldn't take a half hour on a 20meg connection. Oh and enough with the horribad game server setups (cod mw2 for example)They fix those, neat, I still wouldn't pay[/citation]

The cap is your ISP, not Sony. As for MW2's server set up, it was the developers who chose to do it that way.

 

[anonymousdude]

I see no real issue for them charging as long as they implement it correctly. They would need to keep the existing service free. Basically meaning that you can play online for free and access the store. The premium service would be like what they proposed in that article Toms had a while back. The most important thing is that they need to keep it cheaper than XBL, otherwise they will essentially destroy one of their major selling points.

 

[demonhorde665]

[citation][nom]MEGIDDO[/nom]I totally agree with au071. I knew I wanted a ps3 over any other platform for many reasons. Free PSN was one of those reasons. Your asking what would I expect extra for a paid subscription? What is there to offer? Seriously, what could they do that would be a "bonus"? Is there something we could have now that would improve our experience, but dont get it because PSN is free?[/citation]


well xbox live is a pay for service because , it is NOT ont eh open web but instead uses a closed network that is maintained by MS themselves (serversa dn all) , that cost money to maintain , hince why live is charged for. the main differnece this gives is teh benifit that MS can ensure bandwidth stay good so gamers get lower pings and less alg while playign online. if Playstation starts charging they would ahve to do this same thing , other wise thier is no real benifit of payign them , sicne tit would stilk be a open net service that sues standard servers and lag and ping would stil hinge on how many peoepla re beign rotued thorugh the public internet servers not jsut how many gamers of that console are . in short if sony does this with otu switchign to aclosed network of servers .. then they wil be charging folsk for teh same shitty interent servers that PSN already runs on, with no benifit to teh payign customer.

 

[demonhorde665]

[citation][nom]shadowkazama[/nom]The cap is your ISP, not Sony. As for MW2's server set up, it was the developers who chose to do it that way.[/citation]


that's anotehr thing about live versus PSN ,

in live MS controls teh servers not teh developers , so every game essintially ahst eh same set upa dn sues only one log account , while PSN dioesnt control teh game's servers so every company ahs a difernt log in procedure and differnt server set up.

 

[nzprogamer]

[citation][nom]hakesterman[/nom]I would expect alot of people exiting the PS3 market................[/citation]

i sold my xbox last Xmas. i was planing to get a PS3 for Easter. i need to ready think about it now.... i think i will just play with my PC from now on

[citation][nom]au071[/nom]I probably won't pay for it. I thought that was one of their big selling point v.s. Xbox 360...[/citation]

i want the PS3 for the FF XIII and FF XIV for online play. PC STILL RULE the GAMING WORLD

 

[toastninja17]

This really infuriates me, because I still need to buy MW2, I love it online. And I don't want to buy it for PS3 and then have to pay. It's the SOLE reason I'm buying it for PS3 over 360. Free online. Fucking infuriating.

 

[pocketdrummer]

What a stupid idea THAT would be.

Really, I still won't buy an Xbox purely for the fact that I already have a formidable computer with internet access. Why PAY to pay online when I can do it for free?

I can't believe gamers actually went along with that crap in the first place...

 

[Guest]

its bad enough the games are outragily expensive and now they are thinking about "pay to play" if thats the case ill go back to playing games on steam

 

[ch42832n]

What! Has Sony gone insane! People join PSN rather than XBox Live because PSN is free. If Sony start charging fee, then I'm switching.

 

[Sekondary]

Sony expects that most people who can afford to spend $300+ on a entertainment device will have the available $5-15 every month to pay for a service that will evolve with the life of the machine. They relate mainly to the Japanese market, where food and cost of living is higher than most everything else, so priorities are not on lavish items like PS3s and 360s. If you can't afford the cost of ownership, which is probably readily available in your car's cupholder, then you should reconsider your ability to make good financial choices.

Don't hate Sony because you spent 3 years allowance on a PS3 and your parents won't fork out for PSN.

 

[anamaniac]

I pay $60-70 for a game, I expect online to be a complimentary service.
Screw you Sony, PSN is absolute crap anyways.

 

[easierpc]

I'd love to consider paying for PSN if they upped the content and included a Netflix subscription. I'd dump my cable movie channels and save money by paying a fee that included premium content. If they added TV shows I'd be very interested. because I'd be able to dump cable altogether. I already d/l movies and shows to watch through the PS3 on my big screen, if Sony was smart they'd provide more content to make the PS3 more useful and relevant in a digital convergence sort of way.

 

[cj_online]

PS3 might be undoubtedly better than 360 in several aspects, however 360 still holds the bigger share of the market and the only strong point psn had over live (which allowed it to even remotely compete) was that it was free... and now with that gone... PSN is screwed. I might as well switch to 360.